[Zope] Re: Plone/Zope on Debian Sarge

Tue Apr 5 18:43:33 EDT 2005

On 05.Apr 2005 - 13:49:04, Derrick Hudson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 07:34:14PM +0200, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> | On 05.Apr 2005 - 12:01:14, Derrick Hudson wrote:
> | > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 02:02:43PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
> | > but before that began the packages were just fine.  It would seem,
> | > too, that the bit-rot will recede in the near future.  In the
> | > meantime, I would recommend using the upstream source for
> | > installation.
> | 
> | As I said, if you install zope27 you get a message what to do next to
> | get the instance up and running. The same with plone. The only
> | drawback at the moment is, that you need to change the zope.conf to
> | get some packages to work with zope27.
> 
> It's good to see someone with a mainly positive experience using the
> newer packages.

That's a bit too much to say... I used 2.6 packages back in 2003 and
until Debian decided to support multiple instances in its 2.6 packages
everything worked fine. Thus I installed 2.7 in my home when I
restarted my work on the website... I just had an argument on
debian-user-german with somebody who basically said "why does Plone
state it's easy to install and works out of the box, when it doesn't".
He tried with apt-get install plone and after some forth and back I
decided to try it out myself and found that he just didn't read the
debconf-message. So it's basically only the installation experience,
nevertheless this was really good - I seldom find such messages in a
debconf during installation of a package. The normal case from my
experience is that the maintainers just expect the user to go to
/usr/share/doc/<package> and read README.Debian. 

> If you're interested, take a look at

I'm not working with Zope anymore, I'm not even working on those
websites anymore...

> | This will probably change when
> | Debian finally drops zope26
> 
> Or when people finish organizing and implementing a way to support
> multiple versions of zope (which, IMO, is necessary).

I think the 2.6 and 2.7 packages in Debian can quite good coexist, I
mean if you're using those 3 extra product-lines in the conf of
zope2.7 and install all the new Products (that don't work with
zope2.6) into the instance-home it shouldn't be much of a problem.
Of course there coud be a problem with those FileSystem-Products that
store the data in the filesystem, you probably cannot share those with 
the 2 versions, but then it's still easy to have a copy of the
product-folder for each version of zope...

> | (I don't understand why they keep it
> | anyway...)
> 
> I believe they keep it just because it is already there and we are
> near a stable release (and there is no immediate path to safely drop
> it).  More-or-less the same reason python 2.1 and 2.2 are still in
> debian (but won't be in etch).

Ok, I guess I did not get that there was no zope maintainer for a long
time. Because Zope2.7 is not there since some months (I mean
upstream), but for a rather long time... 

> People who are currently using 2.6 will need 2.6 in sarge when it is
> released, and they'll also need 2.7 so they can work on migrating.
> Then 2.7, 2.8 and 3.1 will need to co-exist so people can migrate from
> 2.7 to one of the others and so that individual projects/sites can be
> migrated independently (without needing new hardware or installing
> from source).

Maybe I'm just to used to installing from source, but for upgrading
purposes I would still do it with the source package... I tried to
upgrade the 2.6 instance with the debian 2.7 package, but I messed
up. Doing it with the source package was somehow easier - even though
this probably wasn't a problem of the packages themselves, but of my
knowledge (or better the lack of). Then I read the zope-ml's and found
that a common advice is to use the source packages...

So far for my story, and I do think the debian packages for zope are
quite good (as debian packages are in general ;-)

> PS - did you mean to continue this discuss off- list?

Did I? I don't think so, but maybe you set a header that caused my
mutt to do a CC - anyway the fcc-hook for the mail was active, so I
don't have a copy of it anymore (ML-mails go to /dev/null here).

I'm putting it back on list now.

Andreas

-- 
You will not be elected to public office this year.

-- 
Zum Abmelden eine Mail mit Betreff unsubscribe an zope at dzug.org senden.
http://www.dzug.org/mailinglisten/zope/archive/2005/2005-04/1112728442930

Bitte die Policy beachten: http://www.dzug.org/kommunikation#regeln