[Zope3-dev] Re: Selecting a code name
optilude at gmx.net
Tue Feb 7 03:32:52 EST 2006
On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 01:05:13 -0000, Mikhail Kashkin <m at keysolutions.ru>
>> - Have a *brand*. That means one name, a name that doesn't change. It
>> could just be "Zope 3" with a capital 3, or it could be a more
>> distinctive name, e.g. Zope 3 Zomething (where Zomething is something to
>> be decided) to have an even more distinctive brand; a logo that has some
>> punch, a colour scheme, a web site with proper advocacy and some
>> start-here documentation and some quick tutorials.
>> From my point of view Zope3 (*without* space) more suiteable as brand
> name, there is several reasons (IMHO):
> 1. This is new different platform, based on Zope ideas but with
> absolutely different code bases
Indeed. This is why I think that if a proper moniker (e.g. Zope3 Zimba)
would be better.
Like it or not, Zope (2) seems to have a lot of stigma out there; Zope 3
has been around a while. In actual fact, for a while I thought Zope 3.x
was still just unfinished vapourware, waiting for the fabled Zope2
integration (the dropping of the X) that people were talking about.
My point is just that "Zope 3" still has some stigma and some
pre-conceptions (good or bad) associated with it. With a new "brand
extension" name, we may more easily impart that *now* there's something
new, cool, stable, production worthy. And we'd send the message that it
started with 3.2 (or 3.3 or whatever version we're at when we do this -
whether or not that's strictly true is beside the point - by making this
co-incide with a particular release, it feels like a "launch", like an
achivement, not just something we got around to do - and people may give
us more of a second chance for it).
People may google for that name, see that website (zope3zimba.org), get
the marketing story, feel good about the framework, and crucially - view
it in a fresh light from how they once heard their python geek neighbour
say Zope 2 sucked.
> 2. When users searchin' in search engines 'Zope 3', Google or other
> throw away 3 and search only for Zope
Which would, of course, not be a problem if there was a proper name.
> 3. Zope3 (or zope3) is more pythonic, you cann't name your module
> '''zope 3.webdev''' or something like this.
I don't think this is something that should end up at the code level. The
current zope.* packages are fine, and we don't need to impose this kind of
thing on the poor developers who've just gotten used to the zope 3.x
More information about the Zope3-dev