-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Martin Aspeli wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hey,
Okay, in the interests of making this discussion go quickly, there has been enough negative feedback about renaming Zope 2 to think we have no realistic chance of renaming it.
We are still stuck with the following perceived sequence:
Zope 2, Zope 3
which implies that people should want to upgrade.
Does it? There's precedence for systems where n and n+1 does not represent a linear upgrade path.
The '3' says more "if you're starting afresh, this is where you want to start". I think that's still a correct statement.
Nope. There is no point in treating the two as equivalent choices at this point. Nobody cares about the Z3 equivalent to Z2, only the libraries.
If we don't call Zope Framework "4.0", we'll be fine. We should call its first release 1.0 and there's no implication of a progression.
Yes. For the love of God, please don't call "the Zope Framework" 4.0!
Heh, don't call the "*the* Zope framework" at all! There are a bunch of frameworks lurking in the codebase, and none of them is a "web framework" in the sense the rest of the Python web development community users: Grok and BFG do match what they mean, more or less. Tres - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJ3W2J+gerLs4ltQ4RAhEBAKDLxTlpZDz07ZuTkoby350osK5SoACgoYAC doxYlJBDwzzK8N7CLDWnzVE= =/djo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----