FYI: Lessons from Kai Wu at ArsDigita

How about the following?

Zope 2.x == Any Zope releases
ZCS(Zope Component System).0 == A complete, usable Zope3x without 
backwards compatibility
ZCS.x == Any Zope 3x releases before Zope 3.0
Zope 3.0 == The successor to Zope 2.x, i.e., Zope3x with (some/full?) 
Zope2.x backward API compatibility

You get your "Zope 3.0" but the interim names get some clarity.  Date 
is noncommittal since its not part of the name, ZCS.  ZCS emphasizes 
the architectural changes and promise of the new version.  The prefix 
letter, Z, is a clear reminder that it's Zope (unlike the effect of 
"CMF"); the Z would hopefully keep people on the same page that ZCS is 
all Zope (community wise) even if things are changing behind the 
curtains and under the covers.

?

= Joe =

Jim Fulton wrote:
 >You've got the naming convention wrong. It should be:
 >
 >    Zope 2.x == Any Zope releases
 >
 >      These releases will likely extend beyond Zope 3.0
 >
 >    Zope 3x.0 == A complete, usable Zope without backwards 
compatibility
 >    Zope 3x.x == Any Zope 3x releases before Zope 3.0
 >    Zope 3.0 == The successor to Zope 2.x
 >
 >If the "x" is causing so much confusion, we could certainly entertain
 >another name for it. I'd even be open to a name for 3x that didn't 
have the digit '3'
 >in it.  I'm not open to picking a a different name for Zope 3.0.