[Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Raphael Ritz writes: > Eric Steele wrote: >> Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" >> release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team >> members from each of the currently-existing teams. >> > > I'm with Eric here and offer to participate > from the Plone 3 FWT side. Ditto from the 4 side. Ross ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Eric Steele wrote: Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team members from each of the currently-existing teams. I'm with Eric here and offer to participate from the Plone 3 FWT side. Raphael Eric ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team members from each of the currently-existing teams. Eric On May 7, 2009, at 7:58 PM, Steve McMahon wrote: Let me ask what the level of enthusiasm is in the current P3 framework team. If they'd shift to become the new Plone 2009 team and the existing p4 team would become the "trunk" team, that might be good. We could recruit to add to the new Plone 2009 (old P3) team if some folks are burned out. IMHO, three different framework teams is not organizationally supportable. We'd drown in confusion. On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Martin Aspeli > wrote: Rob Gietema wrote: > I'd nominate the incumbent 3.x team for this; this team already has > the mindset to get this going; the future plone team (trunk team?) is > focusing on vision right now, which I think may not be what's needed > for an in-between team. On second thought; this may be a significant enough release, with it's own 4.x release series, that perhaps a new team altogether is warranted? It would be a shame if the development of Plone trunk will get less focus from the FWT when working on Plone 4. So it might indeed not be a bad idea to have 2 teams, one team for Plone 4 and one team for Plone trunk. I agree. I really wouldn't want to disband or repurpose the "trunk" framework team or release manager. We probably want to look for a new team, maybe with a bit more overlap with the existing/trunk teams than usual. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team -- Steve McMahon Reid-McMahon, LLC st...@reidmcmahon.com st...@dcn.org ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Let me ask what the level of enthusiasm is in the current P3 framework team. If they'd shift to become the new Plone 2009 team and the existing p4 team would become the "trunk" team, that might be good. We could recruit to add to the new Plone 2009 (old P3) team if some folks are burned out. IMHO, three different framework teams is not organizationally supportable. We'd drown in confusion. On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote: > Rob Gietema wrote: >> >> > I'd nominate the incumbent 3.x team for this; this team already has >> > the mindset to get this going; the future plone team (trunk team?) >> is >> > focusing on vision right now, which I think may not be what's needed >> > for an in-between team. >> >> On second thought; this may be a significant enough release, with it's >> own 4.x release series, that perhaps a new team altogether is >> warranted? >> >> >> It would be a shame if the development of Plone trunk will get less focus >> from the FWT when working on Plone 4. So it might indeed not be a bad idea >> to have 2 teams, one team for Plone 4 and one team for Plone trunk. > > I agree. I really wouldn't want to disband or repurpose the "trunk" > framework team or release manager. We probably want to look for a new team, > maybe with a bit more overlap with the existing/trunk teams than usual. > > Martin > > -- > Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who > want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book > > > ___ > Framework-Team mailing list > Framework-Team@lists.plone.org > http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team > -- Steve McMahon Reid-McMahon, LLC st...@reidmcmahon.com st...@dcn.org ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Rob Gietema wrote: > I'd nominate the incumbent 3.x team for this; this team already has > the mindset to get this going; the future plone team (trunk team?) is > focusing on vision right now, which I think may not be what's needed > for an in-between team. On second thought; this may be a significant enough release, with it's own 4.x release series, that perhaps a new team altogether is warranted? It would be a shame if the development of Plone trunk will get less focus from the FWT when working on Plone 4. So it might indeed not be a bad idea to have 2 teams, one team for Plone 4 and one team for Plone trunk. I agree. I really wouldn't want to disband or repurpose the "trunk" framework team or release manager. We probably want to look for a new team, maybe with a bit more overlap with the existing/trunk teams than usual. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Plone 2009: Going from here
> > > > I'd nominate the incumbent 3.x team for this; this team already has > > the mindset to get this going; the future plone team (trunk team?) is > > focusing on vision right now, which I think may not be what's needed > > for an in-between team. > > On second thought; this may be a significant enough release, with it's > own 4.x release series, that perhaps a new team altogether is > warranted? > > It would be a shame if the development of Plone trunk will get less focus from the FWT when working on Plone 4. So it might indeed not be a bad idea to have 2 teams, one team for Plone 4 and one team for Plone trunk. -- Rob Gietema Four Digits ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: [Plone-developers] The new Plone 4.0, was Re: Plone 3.5
On 05.05.2009, at 23:44, Steve McMahon wrote: So, a couple of questions for us all: 1) If we call it Plone 4.0, can we restrict ourselves to a modest list of improvements that will actually get coded this summer and tested this fall? that should be the litmus test for any feature IMHO, simple as that. 2) If we call it Plone 4.0, can we resist ourselves to changes that will not break existing theme products or well-constructed Plone 3 add ons? a major release should be 'allowed' to break some things. but it should provide migration help for 3rd party devs; this is more a social skill than a technical skill. and i'm sure we can pull it off :) e.g. 4.0 should contain blob support. that *will* break certain 3rd party products (mainly, of course, 'homebaked' blob products etc. any site that uses those will not work OOTB after upgrading to 4.0. that can't be helped per se. but we should make an effort to seek out any (sufficiently popular) 3rd party products and contact their developers and include them in the 4.0 process. proactivity is the keyword here. don't call us, we'll call you. just my €0.02, tom ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] The new Plone 4.0, was Re: Plone 3.5
On 05.05.2009, at 16:57, Hanno Schlichting wrote: To summarize the feedback from the European time zone, I think that the proposal in general meets the favor of everyone. The controversial issue is the exact version number to use for the release. There seems to be broad support for freeing the current Plone trunk from a version designator and release a 4.0 release with the envisioned scope of this proposal instead. If I do not get a strong signal or message otherwise, consider this proposal changed in this regard. +1 ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Plone 2009: Going from here
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 18:16, Martijn Pieters wrote: >> 1) Should there be a significant new feature release of Plone this >> year? What are its most basic goals? Which framework team is in >> charge? [..] > I'd nominate the incumbent 3.x team for this; this team already has > the mindset to get this going; the future plone team (trunk team?) is > focusing on vision right now, which I think may not be what's needed > for an in-between team. On second thought; this may be a significant enough release, with it's own 4.x release series, that perhaps a new team altogether is warranted? -- Martijn Pieters ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Plone 2009: Going from here
On May 6, 2009, at 5:15 PM, Steve McMahon wrote: I suggest that the Framework Teams try to make the basic decisions and suggest a release manager by May 13th. That will allow the board to take it up at our May14th meeting. oh, and +1 on that. andi -- zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - i...@zitc.de friedelstraße 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779 pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/ plone 3.2.2 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone/ PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Plone 2009: Going from here
On May 6, 2009, at 5:15 PM, Steve McMahon wrote: We need to move the Plone 2009 proposal forward (whether it's 3.5 or 4.0). first of all, thanks for following up on this, steve! I'd like to suggest that the combined Plone 3 and 4 framework teams make the decisions on this. i'm not entirely sure if all of this is for the framework team to decide, but i'll give my thoughts anyway just in case... 1) Should there be a significant new feature release of Plone this year? +1 What are its most basic goals? try to simplify things a bit for users, integrators & developers, upgrade and clean up underlying technology, pave to way for more intrusive changes aka "the cms formerly known as plone4". :) Which framework team is in charge? the new fwt4 — it should be plone 4.0 after all, see below... 2) What should this new release be called/numbered? i'd really like to get feedback from the marketing committee, but atm i'm leaning very much to calling it plone 4.0. cheers, andi -- zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - i...@zitc.de friedelstraße 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779 pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/ plone 3.2.2 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone/ PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
