--On 24. März 2006 10:00:46 -0800 Christopher Lozinski <lozinski@freerecruiting.com> wrote:

I am interested in maintaining them, documenting them, and upgrading them.

Cool. I think a good starting point would be to update <http://www.plope.com/Books/2_7Edition/CustomZopeObjects.stx>

I have been through the code a number of times, and if someone would spend 15 minutes explaining the high level design decisions, I could probably keep them up to date. Why do they have multiple properties on a property sheet, instead of having a list of independent data types?

Ask Jim :-)

I am also very interested in versions, and maintaining versions.

I think versions are history and have gone in Zope 2.8 or even Zope 2.7.

Versionning and ZClasses make the fastest single user development environment I have ever seen in my life. If your company can afford file based development, great, but some of us live on the income from our web sites, and really want to develop fast.

Fast is only one point of successful software development. How to you meet the goals extensibility & maintenance with ZClasses or do you write only write-once-throw-away apps?

And I object to the statement that "most people with solid backgrounds". I would prefer if you said that: "In certain circumstances ZClasses makes sense, in other circumstances, file based development makes better sense. In some cases Plone is better, in some cases Zope is better, in some cases Ruby on Rails is better, in some cases Zope3 is better". Different situations require different choices.

This brings us back to the old discussion where we want to go with Zope in the future and what our target audience for Zope should/will be. I have some clear thought on that but that's only one opinion among others. Andreas

Christopher Lozinski wrote:

I am interested in maintaining them, documenting them, and upgrading them.

Cool. I urge you to do less first. :)

I have been through the code a number of times, and if someone would spend 15 minutes explaining the high level design decisions, I could probably keep them up to date. Why do they have multiple properties on a property sheet, instead of having a list of independent data types?

Perhaps we could schedule a phone call. If your interested, please send me a private mail or catch me on irc.

I am also very interested in versions, and maintaining versions.

Hm. Versions. Hm. :) I guess if the limitations are very well understood, then versions could be OK. Just like with ZClasses. It would also be nice if you had more control, so for example, you could leverage multi-databases to separate your version-controlled and other data. For specific applications, that could go a long way toward avoiding version lock problems. I really really really want to remove the version support from ZODB, but provide equivalent functionality through some other mechanism, like storage adapters. (Imagine, for example, a Demo storage that can commit it's changes to an underlying storage.)

Versionning and ZClasses make the fastest single user development environment I have ever seen in my life. If your company can afford file based development, great, but some of us live on the income from our web sites, and really want to develop fast.

Yup

And I object to the statement that "most people with solid backgrounds". I would prefer if you said that: "In certain circumstances ZClasses makes sense, in other circumstances, file based development makes better sense. In some cases Plone is better, in some cases Zope is better, in some cases Ruby on Rails is better, in some cases Zope3 is better". Different situations require different choices.

Well said. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:jim@zope.com Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org