[Zope-dev] Clarification re: Zope X3.1, 2.8

[Martijn Faassen]

Andreas Jung wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Samstag, 19. März 2005 18:15 Uhr +0100 Martijn Faassen 
> <faassen at infrae.com> wrote:
> 
>> No debate with doing an alpha, though. There are likely to be more kinks
>> to be worked out indeed. 
> 
> I have update the 2.8 wiki with the planned release schedule.

Thanks! Looks good. I'll commit some time to make this work.

[snip]
>> We must face that in practice most testing by the wider community will
>> happen *after* the release anyway. I also would like to add that core
>> Plone hackers, core Silva hackers, and core CPS hackers were all at the
>> sprint in Paris and *already* did significant testing. In addition, both
>> Nuxeo and Infrae are using Five in a number of a active development
>> projects at the moment, and Enfold has in fact already been in
>> *production* with Five since last year. This stuff is being tested.
> 
> You are arguing with the Z3/Five hat on. Having a reliable Zope 2.8 version
> with MVCC support is much more important to most people than having a 
> perfect Five support. So the primary goal of the Zope 2.8 release is to have a 
> stable successor release for Zope 2.7.

True, MVCC is important and MVCC needs to be tested, but I believe 
unfortunately the best test for it will be in real world production use, 
and a release will happen before most people risk that...

I believe you'll find it interesting that there was a sprint full of 
people who were motivated to hack on Zope 2.8 because of the Zope 3 
aspect, not the MVCC aspect. I myself proposed several times early in 
the week to go without Five, but people objected. I know I'm hard to 
trust as a source of this, as I have the 'Five hat' on, but it's so 
anyway. :)

>> I don't expect people will have a lot of time to do extensive testing
>> after the sprint, anyhow. Giving people more time to do testing won't
>> actually encourage them doing anything, as they can always wait until
>> later. Setting release dates is the best bet at getting people to do it.
>> Especially if we show we're committed.
> 
> I hope everyone is really commited. We'll see how far we can get with 
> this approach.

I definitely hope people are indeed committed too. :)

Regards,

Martijn