[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-Users] Re: The Zope Software Certification Program and Common Repository Proposal

[Stefane Fermigier]

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:

>Andrew Milton wrote:
>  
>
>>+-------[ Stephan Richter ]----------------------
>>| Hello everyone,
>>| 
>>| With the development of Zope 3, the Zope developers committed to a new 
>>| development process and higher software quality guidelines. With the adoption 
>>| of Zope 3 technologies in the wider Zope community, we should also start 
>>| using the process for third party package development.
>>| 
>>| I have spent the last two weeks working on a proposal that defines a Zope 
>>| Software Certification Program (ZSCP) and a Common Repository that implements 
>>| this process. The proposal is attached to this mail. I welcome any comments 
>>| about it!
>>
>>So in order to even get your Open Source package LISTED, you have to sign over 
>>the rights of your code to Zope Corp (currently, Zope Foundation later), and then
>>check it into the svn respository. 
>>
>>Is this is correct?
>>    
>>
>
>No. The common repository under the wings of ZC/ZF is just *a*
>repository that implements the ZSCP. There can be others, for example
>the Plone repository, the collective repository (perhaps), etc.
>
>I had earlier suggested to Stephan that we should keep the common
>repository separate from ZSCP and there out of this proposal. IMO there
>should be a separate proposal for the common repository. I guess he
>didn't agree.
>
>I think both the ZSCP and the common repository (in the context of the
>ZF) are a great idea. We should try to have as much stuff as possible in
>the common repository, but we shouldn't make the process dependent on it.
>
>I'm therefore still suggesting to divide up the proposal.
>  
>

+1

I specially like the ZSCP proposal. It is very similar to a project we
are involved in, the EDOS project (www.edos-project.org). I strongly
believe that it is a perfect match for the whole idea of having a
component architecture in the first place.

I also like the common repository idea, if it can provide the same level
of QA functions we currently have at nuxeo (trac.nuxeo.org +
buildbot.nuxeo.org), though I fear that Trac can't scale well to a
project spanning several important subprojects (here scaling means
providing both global views and by-project views of what's going on).

However, I believe like you Philipp, that both initiatives should be
decoupled.

  S.

-- 
Stéfane Fermigier, Tel: +33 (0)6 63 04 12 77 (mobile).
Nuxeo Collaborative Portal Server: http://www.nuxeo.com/cps
Gestion de contenu web / portail collaboratif / groupware / open source!