[ZWeb] Zope.org - take 3?

[Andrew Sawyers]

Chris Withers wrote:
> Quite disappointed not to see any replies to this, even if just to say 
> "no, we don't want that".
I'm the typical cynic.  I expected nothing less :)
> 
> What do people think?
I'm holding off on saying anything more then I've said - I'm not sure 
the intention in my earlier comments in retrospect.....frustration I 
suppose.

Andrew
> 
> Chris
> 
> Chris Withers wrote:
> 
>> Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>>
>>> which I understand. The biggest problem that creates is a leadership 
>>> vacuum and any efforts would soon peter out in a flood of discussions 
>>> from a whole lot of more or less well-meaning people. It cannot work 
>>> without a tightly organized *small* group of developers that can work 
>>> without interference from the community at large. That's how things 
>>> get done.
>>
>>
>>
>> OK, I'll bite ;-)
>>
>> I would be happy to head up this effort, and I'm prepared to commit 1 
>> day a week for both February and March to working on Zope.org and 
>> managing the effort of those prepared to help. All I ask in return 
>> would be authority from someone who can grant it to yes/no things that 
>> I'm helping with (to avoid endless discussions that go nowhere) and 
>> the right to produce a case study of the project for my company's 
>> website. Who's in a positon to say yes or no to these requests?
>>
>> Anyway, that aside, what I'd propose is:
>>
>> 1. A small, tightly focussed project
>>
>> 2. Keep the look, feel and functionality aimed for to be identical to 
>> what's there now (hopefully eradicating the myriad of pointless 
>> ramblings that side tracked the NZO effort)
>>
>> 3. Totally focussed on software, NOT content.
>>
>> 4. Aim at building the site with as simply as possible, using no fancy 
>> new software, and sticking to the absolute bare minimum to make it 
>> work fast. If fanciness is needed, let it be in error reporting and 
>> site logging domain, rather than "cool new features".
>>
>> 5. Have an SVN checkout of the instance home of the storage server and 
>> each of the app clients (the client would probably be branched off a 
>> common base, with only the config files being different) so that 
>> people can checkout the software on a local machine and develop stuff 
>> using the usual branch-and-merge model.
>>
>> 6. Enable all "system" software (eg: python, zope, cmf) to be easily 
>> upgraded as needed, so the latest bugfixes can be used as soon as 
>> possbible.
>>
>> 7. (maybe) a functional test suite that actually tests all the 
>> functional aspects we're aiming to support. Does anyone have lots of 
>> experience producing functional test suites?
>>
>> Okay, what do people think?
>>
>> Chris
>>
> 


-- 
Zope Managed Hosting
Systems Administrator/Software Engineer
Zope Corporation
(540) 361-1700