Re: Zope 3 releases?

Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Sunday 07 October 2007 17:13, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> I'm not saying an ecosystem approach is bad, if that's what Zope 3 wants
>> to be. I do think that such an approach needs to be supplemented by a
>> framework approach (and I've been putting work into one way to do that).
> 
> Why? I have no need for anything on top of Zope 3. I just need to have stable 
> sets of packages.=

Because we have endless confusion between Zope 3 the ecosystem and Zope 
3 the web application framework. If you go and make a separate Zope 3 
the web application framework and you can get away with just writing a 
buildout.cfg, then be happy. Just call it something else, as otherwise 
people will confuse it a lot with the exploded Zope 3 libraries. They 
don't *have* to use this particular web framework in order to use Zope 
3. They can also use Zope 2, or Grok.

>> If Zope 3 is an ecosystem, a "release" of Zope 3 the ecosystem doesn't
>> really make much sense. To follow the comparison with Linux
>> distribution, it's more like a "distribution" of an ecosystem.
> 
> I don't understand that sentence.

If Zope 3 is like a linux distribution, we'll have to manage it like a 
linux distribution does. A linux distribution has releases, but it 
doesn't have releases of something individual you install and run. It 
just has semi-frozen ecosystems being released once every while.

You can't do this and at the same time manage Zope 3 as an application, 
I think. It's an either-or.

>> I'd 
>> therefore suggest that the release of Zope 3.4, if it ever actually
>> happens, will be the last release of Zope 3 the application server
>> framework.
> 
> That would be really bad. Who defines stable sets then? Again, I think there 
> is absolutely no need for another framework on top of Zope 3.

The stable sets for the web application server are defined by those 
people who develop the Zope 3 web application server. The people who 
develop the web application server make choices that other users of Zope 
3 technology might not make: perhaps to use Twisted for a web server. 
Perhaps to use paste for configuration, or *not* use paste for 
configuration. They might at some point decide that z3c.form is the 
default form framework that is documented in Zope 3 tutorials, instead 
of zc.formlib.

Hopefully the users of the Zope 3 technology can work together on 
defining stable sets, but probably not for the entire range: Grok has 
some extra dependencies that Zope 2 may not have, and vice versa, for 
instance.

The Zope 3 web application server is not primarily what the Zope 3 
project appears to be developing. I strongly suspect there are more 
users of Zope 3 technology within the Plone community than outside it, 
for instance. If the Zope 3 project cared about developing a web server, 
you'd think it would do a somewhat better job presenting it to the 
outside world on a web page, and that there'd be more people to actually 
make releases?

Regards,

Martijn