[Zope-dev] Re: AW: AW: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists

[Philipp von Weitershausen]

Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Saturday 06 October 2007 13:14, Andreas Jung wrote:
>>> You are using 7 times the term "Zope2" and 9 times "Zope 3"
>>> and also "Plone 3.0" in this small text. Can you try to describe
>>> this without "2 or 3" in "Zope *"? I guess not, right?
>> s/Zope 2/Zope application server
>> s/Zope 3/Zope components
> 
> I personally feel quiet offended to see Zope 3 degraded to a set of 
> components. Zope 3 in itself is also an application server; Zope 2, on the 
> other hand, is an application.

You have a point here.

Zope 3 is an application server.
Zope 2 is an application/application server.
Grok is a self-proclaimed web framework.

They all share common components which I'd like to call "the Zope 
Libraries" (zope.*).

Zope is a diverse community, but there's unity in the libraries. This is 
what Zope 3 is mostly about. The Zope 3 app server is this one special 
configuration where zope.app.publication and zope.app.securitypolicy is 
used. There are, in fact, many other possible uses of those libraries 
without having to call it "Zope 3".

zope3-dev is really about discussing those libraries. Sometimes we also 
talk about the app server, but that happens rarely if you think about it.

>>> I really don't care about how it is called, but I'm sure we
>>> need some naming convention and since we have one, I don't see
>>> any reason to change this.
>> As said: there was a big discussion on the terms "Zope 2" and
>> "Zope 3" during the last DZUG conference. Bringing it to the point:
>> the terms "zope 2" and "zope 3" should die. There's only 'Zope'.
> 
> I have not been involved in this discussion. Having discussions like this 
> during a conference is good as a starting point, but should never be seen as 
> a canonical decision.

I don't think there's been a canonical decision. But I think it's one of 
the challenges that the ZF board is supposed to address. This is, after 
all, what the community governance is for.

>> Although you are a Zope component-only  developer
>> you can not ignore the dependent applications and framework.
> 
> So you are saying I have to change Zope 3's story to cope with Zope 2's 
> identity crisis? Honestly, degrading Zope 3 to a set of libraries and 
> components is marketing poisoning for people deploying pure Zope 3 
> applications.

Nobody's trying to do that. We didn't "explode" Zope 3 because Zope 2 
could cope better with it that way. It happened out of other reasons. 
You know that.

You can't ignore the fact that the Zope Libraries are used elsewhere. 
That doesn't mean I'm not encouraging people to use Zope3-the-app 
server. We should just think about what Zope3-the-app server really is. 
It's just a special configuration of those libraries. And it's just one 
possible one (Grok is another possible one, for example). I think we 
should give both of those as well as Zope 2 an adequate place in Zope's 
story. Ignoring that all three exist and thinking they are separate from 
each other is wishful thinking.


-- 
http://worldcookery.com -- Professional Zope documentation and training