On Wed, 19 May 1999 09:18:52 -0400, Jim Fulton <jim@digicool.com> said: [stuff about CVS...] Jim> Zope, on the other hand, is transaction oriented. Zope tracks Jim> meta-data for transactions, not individual objects. This is a much Jim> saner approach, IMO. Yes, one thing that Smalltalk and more recently, Java Beans, have taught us is that the file and directory structure was really just an artifact of the editing process. (Die-hard C and Makefile coders probably will disagree) Abstracting away from the filesystem or leaving it behind completely allows you much greater freedom. For example see a Smalltalk environment like Visual Works or Squeak, or for Java, IBM Visual Age for Java. The reason I'm kind of chiming in here, is that as a total Zope/Python newbie, it's kind of consfusing as a developer how Zope relates to my filesystem. Granted, the idea of a URL representing an object, method and parameters is very intuitive and appealing. But from a development point of view, it's it little rough going figuring out the alternatives to just typing DTML in an HTML form. Import and Export only can use pickled python objects right? In Visual Age you can import/export source code, compiled code, or archived code. In Zope the other methods add more complexity: FTP support is rough or broken, WebDAV is coming soon, Netscape PUT is rumored to work, not that great. I have no idea how all these ways of editing zope objects map into the "transaction oriented" model which you speak of. Alex Rice | alrice@swcp.com | http://www.swcp.com/~alrice Current Location: N. Rio Grande Bioregion, Southwestern USA