Re: Zope3 name

Seb Bacon wrote:
> 
> I think you are being too literal - you are thinking too much like a 
> developer (unsurprisingly ;-), and not enough like a 'suit'.
> 
> *We* all know that the name has nothing to do with the development or 
> quality of a product (hence my use of the word 'apparently.')  But if 
> everyone thought like that, there would be no need for the advertising 
> industry at all.  And everyone would buy the cheapest toothbrush, the 
> one without the triple bend handle and the multi-angled, hand-finished 
> bristles.
> 
> My propositions:
> 
>  - there is some confusion about Zope 3, despite your best efforts to
>    clear things up
>  - some of this confusion might be solved with some simple rebranding
> 
> If it were demonstrated that the majority of the Zope public (or even, 
> just your customers) felt more comfortable with the next generation of 
> Zope being called "Zope Component Server 1.0" (for *whatever* reason), 
> would you still oppose such a move?
> 
I'd like to step in with slightly naive opinion. I think that Zope 
Component Server is a very good name to explain that Zope3 (Zope 
Component Server ;-) is a very new and more capable product, and in 
parallel that it still need some time to be finished.


OTH, if the intention is really to ease migration in any way (migration 
tools, backporting, foreporting of Zope2 API...), ZCS could induce the 
wrong feeling that it will be difficult to migrate.

> If not, there is a simple way of moving this issue forward.
> 
> If so, could you elucidate your reasons?
> 
> seb
> 
> 
-- 
Godefroid Chapelle

BubbleNet sprl
Louvain-la-Neuve Belgium