Hi, So, I saw Martijn's "paver: buildout is utterly doomed" message on Tuesday, but I haven't had a chance to respond to it until now. As Kent points out immediately following, I plan to use zc.buildout's machinery. I actively use zc.buildout now, and I'm looking forward to getting my buildout merged into my pavement.py. I totally agree with Martijn that buildout needs a better website and I'm glad to see that Baiju is going forward with that. Ultimately, though, I think that people will choose to use buildout alone or paver+buildout (or maybe paver+virtualenv, depending on their tastes) completely based on what fits their brains better. I emailed a fair bit with Zed Shaw about his Vellum tool. He adamantly opposes having his builds defined in a full-blown language (ie Python), whereas for my needs I really want to define my builds in Python. But I want it to be easier to do than what you get with the Python standard library. People who prefer to keep there build information in a "data" format will no doubt stick with buildout. I have no problem with that. My goal is just to share the workload with other people who have similar build and deployment problems to the ones I have. Kevin