[Zope-CMF] Re: concerns regarding plone

[Robert Rottermann]

David,



Your Arguments are valid,



However, the new stuff that is added to Plone so that, as Alain points out,
you need not using them.

So these new features impose no reason why not to create a v1.0 and call for
no extra work to maintain.



There is no way to do it right, not the first and not the n-th time.

CMF was not right the first time, it is not now (or we would never see CMF
1.4). It is "merely" very good and very usable. So is Plone.

Creating a version is more a question of mindset than of features.



Robert



----- Original Message -----

From: "David (Hamish) Harvey" <david.harvey@bristol.ac.uk>

To: <zope-cmf@zope.org>

Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 2:39 PM

Subject: Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: concerns regarding plone



>
>
> --On Monday, August 19, 2002 13:27:19 -0400 Jeff Kowalczyk <jtk@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Robert Rottermann wrote:
> >> I have concerns regarding the way Plone evolves. Some two weeks ago
> > runyaga
> >> announced that a Plone 1.0 version will be released within hours after
> >> CMF 1.3 hits the street.
> >
> > FWIW, I am grateful to have worthwhile API changes happen now, because
>
> FWIW, likewise.
>
> > we'd be stuck with the alternative for an entire 1.x series. Upgrading
> > deployed portals later would be painful. A lot of template content and
> > python content products will be built on Plone 1.0, and that's effort
> > that multiplies with API shortcomings or misfeatures, so Plone should
> > take as long as it needs to become fully baked. </$.02>
>
> I see your 2 cents and raise you another 1 or so, to make it British and 2
> pence :-)
>
> Exactly. I have a site running on a now venerable version of Plone. I'm
> deep in PhD thesis writing at the moment, so it's been put on hold for a
> while. It continues to run, but isn't getting much traffic - it's already
> proving its worth though just in letting me keep it up to date with
> content. When I get back to it, I'll start bringing it up to date with the
> latest Plone - which may or may not be 1.0 by that time. I won't update
the
> production site unless or until Plone 1.0 is released. But the changes
> under discussion sound to me as if they are so worthwhile (I'm passively
> monitoring the list in amazement - way to go, guys) that I'd prefer them
to
> be included in v1.
>
> The counter argument I guess is that this could go on forever - freeping
> creaturitis. If you substitute "feature" for "bug" in the poem "the last
> bug", you get close (ok, it doesn't quite work):
>
> http://www.tuatha.org/~mpk/weirdness/last-bug.html
>
> The point is though that the changes being made are fundamental
> rationalisations and basic improvements in the way Plone works.
> Flexibility, extensibility, usability all look set to be drastically
> improved. And if Plone 1.0 was released without the basic mechanisms in
> place, then the developers would end up supporting a Plone 1.0 series for
> those who jumped on board early, and a later series with the changes for
> those who waited/updated. If a release was made without them, a raft more
> people would build sites with Plone who then weren't willing or able to
> move to 2.0 (say).
>
> Compare calculators --- HP get it right first time, sell the same one for
> years, Casio put out a new one every week --- or <troll>programming
> languages --- java, perl, (dare I say it) python have periodic substantial
> changes, SmallTalk was right from the outset and has barely changed in 20
> years</troll>.
>
> So, I say +1 - get it right, then release. See y'all again in November.
>
> Cheers,
> Hamish
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF@zope.org
> http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf
>
> See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
>