Re: names

On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Joseph Grace wrote:

> X3 may be attractive to you, but the origin of this issue is confusion 
> to non-core people.  I do not believe you are part of that target 
> market, so you are not going to experience the confusion.  Hackish 
> names are not very clear.

I just don't believe giving the thing some alternate name, chosen
because it is completely different than "Zope <whatever>", will shed
any light.  In fact, i strongly feel it will lead to more confusion,
for core and non-core people.

If your concern is about uninformed people mistaking the purpose of
the Zope 3x release according to the name, then it seems to me you
would want to be more explicit about in the name, rather than shifting
it to "something completely different" (sorry - i couldn't resist
hints of the spanish inquisition:).

I would expect you to be advocating something like "Zope 3 Interim" or
"Zope 3 No-2-compat" or "Zope 3 Experimental".

My _own_ understanding about major revision shifts is that they do not
traditionally imply backwards compatability, and anyone doing the
migration daggone well better investigate the compatability claims are
before committing to it!

-- 
Ken
[email protected]