[Zope2-migration] Zope3 name

[Paul Everitt]

On mardi, fév 11, 2003, at 20:23 Europe/Paris, Jim Fulton wrote:

>
> Paul Everitt wrote:
>> On Tuesday, Feb 11, 2003, at 11:07 Europe/Paris, seb bacon wrote:
>>> There has been a discussion about naming Zope3, which I would like 
>>> to revive.
>>>
>>> First (and what got me thinking about it again): was it appropriate 
>>> to call the pre-New-Year-release  an 'alpha'?  On the one hand, I 
>>> know Jim is keen to keep up the momentum among developers.  On the 
>>> other, it suggests (to me) a level of maturity which the product has 
>>> not yet reached, which could damage perceptions from the outside.
>> I had a couple of business people, e.g. folks in the government, ask 
>> me such questions last week at the conference.
>
> What were the questions?

Things like, will my site still work, should I deploy a new application 
today or wait, can we use the expertise we've acquired, will Plone 
work.  The first two were the big ones with decision makers.

>  > I'm sure my responses gave
>> the impression of some rather tortured tap dancing.
>
> I'm puzzled by this. I thought that the schedule I posted, the note 
> that Rob
> posted, and out commitment for supporting the transition would have 
> prepared
> you to answer questions, which is why I'm curious about the questions.

I'm puzzled that you're puzzled. :^)  The nature of the transition has 
been in a "we'll figure that out later" status.  Well, clearly I can't 
field too many questions with that stance.

My challenge is getting into the first level of detail beyond the broad 
strokes outlined in the two documents you mentioned.  Examples:

1) Will Zope 3 support the Zope 2 API, or even a subset?

2) Will Zope 2 support the Zope 3 API, or even a subset?  (This is 
discussed below.)

3) If the community isn't interested in working on migration, will ZC 
devote the resources to complete the job?

4) During 2003, developers will have three APIs to choose from (Zope 2, 
CMF, Zope 3).  Will they know when to choose one versus the other?

5) Will ZC participate in the ongoing development of Zope 2 and CMF, 
keeping it "active" with (reasonably compelling) features until the 
time Zope 3 is capable of doing all that Zope 2 + CMF can do?

The challenge for me is in the nature of itch-scratching.  As some of 
these topics have come up, the reply has been "well, if somebody wants 
to do it or if a company pays for it, it will get done."  And that's 
largely true.  But this weakens a bit the commitment made in the two 
documents you cited.  Unless, of course, ZC will fill in the places 
that don't attract development, but are necessary for smooth migration.

> Maybe we all (who are involved in answering these questions) need to to
> a better job of being armed with the answers.

True.

>> I think we have to give up on discussions of backporting.  There's 
>> simply little interest amongst the core team for such an approach.  
>> It's a shame, because I think history has proven that such an 
>> approach (forward or backwards) is Exhibition Number One in a 
>> transition strategy. :^(
>
> I don't understsnd why you would say this.  I specifically discussed
> migrating some Zope 3 technologies back to Zope 2 as part of the 
> transition
> strategy.

Hmm, then I completely misunderstood.  I was recalling a private 
exchange you and I had in December when (at least I thought) you were 
underwhelmed by such an idea.  I also was referencing comments made by 
others on the core team, in IRC and on this list.

My apologies, I certainly got this wrong.  If meaningful parts of Zope 
3 are introduced back into Zope 2, then we're in good shape.

>> Regarding 2.x, one part I'm not clear on is the status of 2.x.  Based 
>> on the ZC official stance, 2.x is not being "terminated", meaning, 
>> applications will still be supported and new projects initiated.
>> However, is 2.x "end-of-lifed"?
>
> Someday, yes, but not today.
>
>  > Meaning, will new features be added?
>
> Yes. How long this will be the case depends on the needs and interests 
> of
> users and developers.

Ok, that's good news too.

This has been a very good email, thanks.

--Paul