[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Zope and zope

[Jim Fulton]

Chris McDonough wrote:
> Note that the reason I suggested renaming Zope to "zope2" (or whatever) as
> opposed to "zope" to "zope3" is because Zope 3 uses absolute imports almost
> everywhere; it would be far less work to change "Zope" to "Zope2" because
> Zope 2 either uses relative imports or assumes it can find what it needs on
> sys.path. 

Zope 3 is still (for a short time) in a far more plastic state. There aren't
many third-party products and their authors expect change at this time.
For example, we very recently rearranged the zope.app package.

 > I think the breakage, although literally "incalculable" (as is
> every change to Zope 2, given that it has no canonical API), would be
> manageable given enough lead time.  In fact, if we did change the module
> name, we could just leave a "bruce" package in place that, when imported,
> raised a "ObsoleteError" with a descriptive message.

But I think that this is a big problem. Backward compatibility for Z2 *is*
important.  It's too bad that lots of test files have to import Zope. Sigh.

> I *hate* the idea of having two packages named "zope" where case is the only
> thing different. 

Me too, the more I think about it.

 > It's would be insanely difficult (not to mention
> embarrassing) to document, should the two codebases merge in some unholy
> fashion at some point as is on the 2.9 roadmap.

Actually, the Zope 2.8 roadmap. :)  Zope 2.8 will have Zope 3 interfaces.

Jim

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