Announcing: Zope 4.0 project
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On behalf of the Zope community, I am pleased to announce the creation of the "Zope 4.0" project. After extensive discussion with the Zope wizards in conclave at PyCon 2009, the new project's website has been launched: http://zopefour.org/ Enjoy! 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 iD8DBQFJ01VR+gerLs4ltQ4RAiljAKCACB9aMtI3YnsXPZss4hdEDrA7FACgsqv7 3jR6FQeEy0qpX4D4NOX+HsA= =q8Fu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Tres Seaver wrote:
On behalf of the Zope community, I am pleased to announce the creation of the "Zope 4.0" project. After extensive discussion with the Zope wizards in conclave at PyCon 2009, the new project's website has been launched:
Er? Little more context and explanation please... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
*looks at the date* *sigh* I'll go back to my cave now... Chris Chris Withers wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
On behalf of the Zope community, I am pleased to announce the creation of the "Zope 4.0" project. After extensive discussion with the Zope wizards in conclave at PyCon 2009, the new project's website has been launched:
Er?
Little more context and explanation please...
Chris
-- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Tres Seaver wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On behalf of the Zope community, I am pleased to announce the creation of the "Zope 4.0" project. After extensive discussion with the Zope wizards in conclave at PyCon 2009, the new project's website has been launched:
Ah, best one yet. :) Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book
Remember this: http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2001/04/01/parrot.htm Well, that lead to this: http://www.parrot.org/ One of the reasons I got suckered into replying was that I thought this might be the result of some stuff a few of us had talked about at the Zope BOF at PyCon. I actually think having a 4.0 release of Zope that unifies things could be used to make things a lot clearer... - Zope Framework 4.0 What Martijn has announced and is already being worked on extensively. - Zope A 4.0 What was to be Zope 2.12 - Zope B 4.0 Whatever the next pending release of the Zope 3 appserver stuff was to be. (Need to keep the Canonical and ZC guys happy afterall ;-) ) www.zope.org could then just be a radically cut down link portal to a.zope.org, b.zope.org and framework.zope.org, which I'd imagine to be brochurewear, download and/or KGS sites for each of the above. I'd suggesting splitting the svn access stuff out to dev.zope.org because it transcends all three. docs.zope.org could hoover up the rest, with any remaining stuff being humanely dispatched. Seriously, how do people feel about this? Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Apr 2, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
Remember this:
http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2001/04/01/parrot.htm
Well, that lead to this:
One of the reasons I got suckered into replying was that I thought this might be the result of some stuff a few of us had talked about at the Zope BOF at PyCon.
I actually think having a 4.0 release of Zope that unifies things could be used to make things a lot clearer...
- Zope Framework 4.0
What Martijn has announced and is already being worked on extensively.
- Zope A 4.0
What was to be Zope 2.12
- Zope B 4.0
Whatever the next pending release of the Zope 3 appserver stuff was to be. (Need to keep the Canonical and ZC guys happy afterall ;-) )
www.zope.org could then just be a radically cut down link portal to a.zope.org, b.zope.org and framework.zope.org, which I'd imagine to be brochurewear, download and/or KGS sites for each of the above.
I'd suggesting splitting the svn access stuff out to dev.zope.org because it transcends all three.
docs.zope.org could hoover up the rest, with any remaining stuff being humanely dispatched.
Seriously, how do people feel about this?
I don't think we need A&B. Maybe just "Zope" and "Zope Framework". I like the idea of using a number larger than 3. (I've suggested 5 in the past.) Overall +1. Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation
Jim Fulton wrote:
What Martijn has announced and is already being worked on extensively.
- Zope A 4.0
What was to be Zope 2.12
- Zope B 4.0
Whatever the next pending release of the Zope 3 appserver stuff was to be. (Need to keep the Canonical and ZC guys happy afterall ;-) )
www.zope.org could then just be a radically cut down link portal to a.zope.org, b.zope.org and framework.zope.org, which I'd imagine to be brochurewear, download and/or KGS sites for each of the above.
I'd suggesting splitting the svn access stuff out to dev.zope.org because it transcends all three.
docs.zope.org could hoover up the rest, with any remaining stuff being humanely dispatched.
Seriously, how do people feel about this?
I don't think we need A&B. Maybe just "Zope" and "Zope Framework".
Unfortunately, as we discovered at the BOF, and what is currently a significant cause of confusion, is that the "Zope" bit isn't just one thing, we basically have two app-server projects named Zope right now: - Zope 2 Used by Plone, and a few die-hard stragglers and unfortunate passerby's who get sucked in by the rubbish on www.zope.org - Zope 3 Use by Canonical for Launchpad and (well, was suspected anyway) by ZC. I'm sure there are more. The only sane solution I can think of is to give them both different names (I'm not wedded to A and B, maybe Classic and Advanced?) and let them evolve at their own pace from now on. I suspect their evolution will be glacial compared to things like Repoze.bfg and Grok, which should become the "new user" stories in the Zope world. I'd *really* like to see the majority of the current www.zope.org simply eradicated from existence. It's out of date and a source of nothing but confusion. cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Apr 2, 2009, at 4:17 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
What Martijn has announced and is already being worked on extensively.
- Zope A 4.0
What was to be Zope 2.12
- Zope B 4.0
Whatever the next pending release of the Zope 3 appserver stuff was to be. (Need to keep the Canonical and ZC guys happy afterall ;-) )
www.zope.org could then just be a radically cut down link portal to a.zope.org, b.zope.org and framework.zope.org, which I'd imagine to be brochurewear, download and/or KGS sites for each of the above.
I'd suggesting splitting the svn access stuff out to dev.zope.org because it transcends all three.
docs.zope.org could hoover up the rest, with any remaining stuff being humanely dispatched.
Seriously, how do people feel about this? I don't think we need A&B. Maybe just "Zope" and "Zope Framework".
Unfortunately, as we discovered at the BOF, and what is currently a significant cause of confusion, is that the "Zope" bit isn't just one thing, we basically have two app-server projects named Zope right now:
- Zope 2
Used by Plone, and a few die-hard stragglers and unfortunate passerby's who get sucked in by the rubbish on www.zope.org
- Zope 3
Use by Canonical for Launchpad and (well, was suspected anyway) by ZC. I'm sure there are more.
We and canonical use the Zope Framework. We don't use an application. Zope (aka Zope 2) is an extensible application. We (ZC and Canonical and others) assemble components from the Zope Framework to build our own applications. Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation
Jim Fulton wrote:
We and canonical use the Zope Framework. We don't use an application. Zope (aka Zope 2) is an extensible application. We (ZC and Canonical and others) assemble components from the Zope Framework to build our own applications.
Hmm, maybe I got this wrong, but Gary Poster expressed a strong concern that "zope 3 the app server" needed to keep living. I do think the name "Zope" should never be used on its own again. I think "Zope Classic" would certainly work for "Zope 2 the app server", it conveys the right things: - mature - stable - maybe not the best choice for new development. cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02.04.2009 22:17 Uhr, Chris Withers wrote:
I'd *really* like to see the majority of the current www.zope.org simply eradicated from existence. It's out of date and a source of nothing but confusion.
Andrew & others have been working on this issue at the sprint. There is consensus that www.zope.org must be turned into landing page with some mission statement and then links to the related subprojects. The current zope.org site should be moved to old.zope.org (it must remain available for the time being (with URL redirections to the Products and Member area). - -aj -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAknVH9AACgkQCJIWIbr9KYwZJQCgj1m4OH2KLVwxRej6zh2SaUen rMIAoNpVbCIFop0jLO8LFmhHCxeij9ov =O/6m -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Andreas Jung wrote:
Andrew & others have been working on this issue at the sprint. There is consensus that www.zope.org must be turned into landing page with some mission statement and then links to the related subprojects. The current zope.org site should be moved to old.zope.org (it must remain available for the time being (with URL redirections to the Products and Member area).
Why does it need to keep living even at old.zope.org? Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02.04.2009 22:29 Uhr, Chris Withers wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Andrew & others have been working on this issue at the sprint. There is consensus that www.zope.org must be turned into landing page with some mission statement and then links to the related subprojects. The current zope.org site should be moved to old.zope.org (it must remain available for the time being (with URL redirections to the Products and Member area).
Why does it need to keep living even at old.zope.org?
Because we can't break existing download URL - neither to old Zope releases nor to old product releases. - -aj -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAknVIY8ACgkQCJIWIbr9KYyzOwCdGarB1iSUzJeQJ1m1XJvx29yq 6p8An2pgzm1AXhEeBZd+LyBBpPCYtWE7 =aZgz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Andreas Jung wrote:
Because we can't break existing download URL - neither to old Zope releases
I'd imagine the full set of releases would appear on the respective parts of classic.zope.org or advanced.zope.org...
nor to old product releases.
I wonder how many of these are actually safe to use nowadays? (ie: run without patching and have an active maintainer) Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02.04.2009 22:37 Uhr, Chris Withers wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Because we can't break existing download URL - neither to old Zope releases
I'd imagine the full set of releases would appear on the respective parts of classic.zope.org or advanced.zope.org...
*shrug* I don't care if those releases on the new zope2.zope.org microsite or somewhere else. The point is that the release should remain available under their well-known URL - and I won't work on the migration of the old stuff to a new site in any way :-)
nor to old product releases.
I wonder how many of these are actually safe to use nowadays? (ie: run without patching and have an active maintainer)
This is not the point. We're playing nice and won't break those links - used or not used . - -aj -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAknVIwIACgkQCJIWIbr9KYzbkgCg4dLwS9jao+ay5E7w700iikMI ZlMAoKQpI4UqJBDF2BjR0Uj+LIStKh+8 =Z4yc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Andreas Jung wrote:
I'd imagine the full set of releases would appear on the respective parts of classic.zope.org or advanced.zope.org...
*shrug* I don't care if those releases on the new zope2.zope.org
Please not zope2.zope.org, the insane version naming has *got* to stop...
microsite or somewhere else. The point is that the release should remain available under their well-known URL
How does moving it all to old.zope.org fit with this requirement? Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02.04.2009 22:45 Uhr, Chris Withers wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
I'd imagine the full set of releases would appear on the respective parts of classic.zope.org or advanced.zope.org...
*shrug* I don't care if those releases on the new zope2.zope.org
Please not zope2.zope.org, the insane version naming has *got* to stop...
We might discuss this unhurriedly. To sleep and being in vacation mood in order to discuss this now :-) At least the term 'classic' is a NO-GO for me.
microsite or somewhere else. The point is that the release should remain available under their well-known URL
How does moving it all to old.zope.org fit with this requirement?
That was actually my proposal if I wasn't clear enough. Andreas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAknVJR0ACgkQCJIWIbr9KYwg3ACg3rrtvqlQ4lRCpuSa5tbU2Pkp yRYAnRXOfRhkkYwAHY9BNTbu8TnjXREX =UPOq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Andreas Jung wrote:
We might discuss this unhurriedly. To sleep and being in vacation mood in order to discuss this now :-) At least the term 'classic' is a NO-GO for me.
Why? Would you prefer 'a' or maybe 'old'? ;-)
microsite or somewhere else. The point is that the release should remain available under their well-known URL How does moving it all to old.zope.org fit with this requirement?
That was actually my proposal if I wasn't clear enough.
You were clear that you want both old.zope.org and releases to remain available under their well-known urls. I don't see how those two requirements are compatible? Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02.04.2009 22:52 Uhr, Chris Withers wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
We might discuss this unhurriedly. To sleep and being in vacation mood in order to discuss this now :-) At least the term 'classic' is a NO-GO for me.
Why? Would you prefer 'a' or maybe 'old'? ;-)
microsite or somewhere else. The point is that the release should remain available under their well-known URL How does moving it all to old.zope.org fit with this requirement?
That was actually my proposal if I wasn't clear enough.
You were clear that you want both old.zope.org and releases to remain available under their well-known urls. I don't see how those two requirements are compatible?
You heard of rewrite rules? :-) Andreas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAknVJoEACgkQCJIWIbr9KYwZ/ACeIDqgsWtPkAUJILc1rMYaWYbr K+kAnjjjL54om11gdukeeb7UDml//XW2 =+lhX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 21:29 +0100:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Andrew & others have been working on this issue at the sprint. There is consensus that www.zope.org must be turned into landing page with some mission statement and then links to the related subprojects. The current zope.org site should be moved to old.zope.org (it must remain available for the time being (with URL redirections to the Products and Member area).
Why does it need to keep living even at old.zope.org?
Because members put there content (product implementations) still usable? -- Dieter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dieter Maurer wrote:
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 21:29 +0100:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Andrew & others have been working on this issue at the sprint. There is consensus that www.zope.org must be turned into landing page with some mission statement and then links to the related subprojects. The current zope.org site should be moved to old.zope.org (it must remain available for the time being (with URL redirections to the Products and Member area). Why does it need to keep living even at old.zope.org?
Because members put there content (product implementations) still usable?
There really should be not problem to integrate current www.zope.org/Products and www.zope.org/Members including the LDAP authentication service into an new www.zope.org. No need to break any links - we already did similar with moving DevHome wikis out to wiki.zope.org. I'd be happy to adjust the current skins (Plone1.0.3) to whatever look is needed. Regards Michael - -- http://blog.d2m.at http://planetzope.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJ2GPfl0uAvQJUKVYRAs8rAJ49vcytk452m3tLmAx8zAO76SsmXgCdEXPT 6VfdYi9qIEwq4tcIojsxFSQ= =P5SS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
There really should be not problem to integrate current www.zope.org/Products and www.zope.org/Members including the LDAP authentication service into an new www.zope.org.
I really don't think we need to implement this if Andreas' redirect plan works out. You're more than welcome to maintain old.zope.org ;-)
No need to break any links - we already did similar with moving DevHome wikis out to wiki.zope.org.
Well yeah, but that hasn't made the information there any more maintained. Just last week I had to go through and remove a couple of references to account.php. I know the plan here is to replace that with the contents of http://docs.zope.org/developer/, and have dev.zope.org go to the same place. The sooner that happens the better... cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 08:32, Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
Because members put there content (product implementations) still usable?
Absolutely right. In the long run that should probably be moved over to PyPI though. -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 08:32, Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
Because members put there content (product implementations) still usable?
Absolutely right. In the long run that should probably be moved over to PyPI though.
PyPI won't work for non-eggified products. 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 iD8DBQFJ2Mzd+gerLs4ltQ4RAoCDAKDca6twvQPXLbmrI7yONw7tohfmiACfZGiO WbglTEVSpjjg4T3OcYYB71I= =+83W -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 17:23, Tres Seaver <tseaver@palladion.com> wrote:
PyPI won't work for non-eggified products.
Right, so they need to be eggified then, which is a Good Thing. :) I'm not saying they should be moved *now*. Just in the long run. If the product is still maintained and cared about, eggifying it and moving it to PyPI isn't that much work. The alternative is to make a new products directory on zope.org, which is of course completely possible. -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 17:23, Tres Seaver <tseaver@palladion.com> wrote:
PyPI won't work for non-eggified products.
Right, so they need to be eggified then, which is a Good Thing. :) I'm not saying they should be moved *now*. Just in the long run. If the product is still maintained and cared about, eggifying it and moving it to PyPI isn't that much work.
The alternative is to make a new products directory on zope.org, which is of course completely possible.
Well, I know what Andreas is planning to do is moving the whole thing to old.zope.org and then using rewrite rules to redirect any 404's from www.zope.org to there. That seems like a double win for me: - old urls keep working - no need to add a products sections on www.zope.org I'm sure Andreas will correct me if I'm wrong when he gets back from his holidays... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:16, Chris Withers <chris@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 17:23, Tres Seaver <tseaver@palladion.com> wrote:
PyPI won't work for non-eggified products.
Right, so they need to be eggified then, which is a Good Thing. :) I'm not saying they should be moved *now*. Just in the long run. If the product is still maintained and cared about, eggifying it and moving it to PyPI isn't that much work.
The alternative is to make a new products directory on zope.org, which is of course completely possible.
Well, I know what Andreas is planning to do is moving the whole thing to old.zope.org and then using rewrite rules to redirect any 404's from www.zope.org to there.
Sure. But I don't really see it as necessary to keep old.zope.org around forever and ever. A couple of years, sure, preferably as read-only, and with a change in the templates to say that any content that should be preserved should be moved somewhere else, IMHO. -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64
Lennart Regebro wrote:
The alternative is to make a new products directory on zope.org, which is of course completely possible. Well, I know what Andreas is planning to do is moving the whole thing to old.zope.org and then using rewrite rules to redirect any 404's from www.zope.org to there.
Sure. But I don't really see it as necessary to keep old.zope.org around forever and ever.
Some people do, and doing that means they're happy, so I'm happy :-) Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 15:21, Chris Withers <chris@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
Sure. But I don't really see it as necessary to keep old.zope.org around forever and ever.
Some people do, and doing that means they're happy, so I'm happy :-)
Fair enough. The correct path is I guess as always that those who want to keep it get to be responsible for maintaining it. Problem solved. :) -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 15:21, Chris Withers <chris@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
Sure. But I don't really see it as necessary to keep old.zope.org around forever and ever. Some people do, and doing that means they're happy, so I'm happy :-)
Fair enough. The correct path is I guess as always that those who want to keep it get to be responsible for maintaining it. Problem solved. :)
I won't support anything called 'old.zope.org'. Regards Michael - -- http://blog.d2m.at http://planetzope.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJ2iuIl0uAvQJUKVYRAjmEAKCG+cIitCfHQoAuRdSV7o5LAUB9nACglMtG o7MYqPpBA1kwyUnl6oNZH2o= =HO3T -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
Some people do, and doing that means they're happy, so I'm happy :-) Fair enough. The correct path is I guess as always that those who want to keep it get to be responsible for maintaining it. Problem solved. :)
I won't support anything called 'old.zope.org'.
I appreciate all the work you've provided on zope.org (Michael really has put a lot of effort into trying to get things sorted when no-one else would) but in the instance I see that as a good thing... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tres Seaver wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 08:32, Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
Because members put there content (product implementations) still usable? Absolutely right. In the long run that should probably be moved over to PyPI though.
PyPI won't work for non-eggified products.
What do you mean by "won't work" here? Regards Michael - -- http://blog.d2m.at http://planetzope.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJ2PUdl0uAvQJUKVYRAsSDAJ4sQhE99PcNCAvCRUDptC+du0dxHgCeJa5G 4lLYtwf8EstVj6a5cNmF5W4= =kYa4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Tres Seaver wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 08:32, Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
Because members put there content (product implementations) still usable? Absolutely right. In the long run that should probably be moved over to PyPI though.
PyPI won't work for non-eggified products.
That's not true... PyPI will work in exactly the same way as zope.org for non-eggified products: manual download. What I *would* worry about is non-egg distributions on PyPI causing problems for setuptools and its ilk... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Chris Withers wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 08:32, Dieter Maurer <dieter@handshake.de> wrote:
Because members put there content (product implementations) still usable? Absolutely right. In the long run that should probably be moved over to PyPI though. PyPI won't work for non-eggified products.
That's not true...
PyPI will work in exactly the same way as zope.org for non-eggified products: manual download.
What I *would* worry about is non-egg distributions on PyPI causing problems for setuptools and its ilk...
Exactly: it would defeat the purpose of putting them there 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 iD8DBQFJ2gxJ+gerLs4ltQ4RAg/vAJ9RNMgjH+OGzc/hTWYP6x968ZNtkQCeLn6s I8LDcy8jz9oQs/2nQAC0ERo= =gX8L -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:14, Chris Withers <chris@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
PyPI will work in exactly the same way as zope.org for non-eggified products: manual download.
What I *would* worry about is non-egg distributions on PyPI causing problems for setuptools and its ilk...
Wouldn't easy_install/buildout/etc just fail in those cases? Typically with a "no setup.py found" or something? -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:14, Chris Withers <chris@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
PyPI will work in exactly the same way as zope.org for non-eggified products: manual download.
What I *would* worry about is non-egg distributions on PyPI causing problems for setuptools and its ilk...
Wouldn't easy_install/buildout/etc just fail in those cases? Typically with a "no setup.py found" or something?
I don't know, have you tried it? If that were the case, then I'd be +1 on killing the products part of (new|www|old).zope.org... Chris
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:21, Chris Withers <chris@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:14, Chris Withers <chris@simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
PyPI will work in exactly the same way as zope.org for non-eggified products: manual download.
What I *would* worry about is non-egg distributions on PyPI causing problems for setuptools and its ilk...
Wouldn't easy_install/buildout/etc just fail in those cases? Typically with a "no setup.py found" or something?
I don't know, have you tried it?
Only for Python 3 distributions, and that's what happened there. But point me to a non distutils distro for Python 2 on PyPI and I'll try. :) -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64
participants (8)
-
Andreas Jung -
Chris Withers -
Dieter Maurer -
Jim Fulton -
Lennart Regebro -
Martin Aspeli -
Michael Haubenwallner -
Tres Seaver