On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 08:42, Christian Theune wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 08:35 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> 1. Areas that need somebody responsible should get one. We need
>> somebody to bug people about bugs in the bug tracker. That should be
>> one person, for example. Responsibilities
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 08:35 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 04:13, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> > I wonder what Lennart's solution would be too... Taking a page out of
> > Plone's history:
>
> I was evidently unclear:
>
> My solution is in three parts:
>
> 1. Areas that need so
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 04:13, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> I wonder what Lennart's solution would be too... Taking a page out of
> Plone's history:
I was evidently unclear:
My solution is in three parts:
1. Areas that need somebody responsible should get one. We need
somebody to bug people about bugs
Hi there,
Full disclosure first: I was involved writing up the proposal.
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 00:51 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Lennart Regebro wrote:
> [snip]
> > Sure. But that doesn't mean a steering group is the right solution.
>
> Why not? What do you think is the right solution?
>
>
Adam GROSZER wrote:
> Someone releases a new package version and your project just break the
> next day. That's a nightmare.
That shouldn't happen with individual package releases where releases
are done sensibly.
(ie: if you're going to do a big backwards-incompatible release, let
people know.
Chris McDonough wrote:
> - discourage the contribution of stop energy (discourage
> the utterances of "don't", "stop", "this is wrong",
Well, unless it is...
> - focusing on externalizing software; each egg should stand on its own as
> something that a non-Zope person would be able to underst
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 01:51, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Can you stop using the word "committee"? I didn't use it. A committee is
> a bunch of people who has regular meetings, behind closed doors, to make
> decisions. That's not what the Steering Group is designed to be.
OK, I'll stop using the wor
Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> IMO, we should just try to solve problems we actually have under whatever
>> brand
>> the problem seems to fit under best that *doesn't* have the baggage of the
>> Zope
>> name. We have a good number of brands now (grok, repoze, plone). These
>> brands
>> *do* have lead
Chris McDonough wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I just realized the irony in this:
>>
>> [Martijn spends a lot of time in trying to solve problems in our
>> community, bothering to consult lots of people and writing up a document]
>>
>> [Chris]
>>> I'm pretty sure a steering gro
Chris McDonough wrote:
> Sure. We can be careful, grown-up, conservative, and all that. But I'll note
> that a) there just really aren't that many people using Zope 3 b) the people
> that *are* using Zope 3 by itself are capable of maintaining their own index
> c)
> the people who *aren't* capa
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I just realized the irony in this:
>
> [Martijn spends a lot of time in trying to solve problems in our
> community, bothering to consult lots of people and writing up a document]
>
> [Chris]
>> I'm pretty sure a steering group and a rebranding of existing
Martin Aspeli wrote:
>
> I think Tres and Chris are suggesting we focus leadership around
> individual packages or sets of packages,
Thank you for stating this succinctly; this is exactly right from my
perspective.
and Martijn is suggesting we
> have something a bit broader focusing on all of
Roger Ineichen wrote:
> I'm pretty sure you are not using much zope.* or z3c.* packages
> in your projects as dependency.
A good number. zope.index, zope.component, zope.interface, zope.schema, and so
on. I don't use 78 of them, like anyone who uses Zope 3, but I do use a good
number.
>
> Your
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Monday 02 March 2009, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> Plone, by the way, had a similar problem, and solved it by creating "the
>> framework team". This is a rolling body of people who are responsible
>> for putting out calls for and reviewing improvements proposals. They
>> basi
On Monday 02 March 2009, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Plone, by the way, had a similar problem, and solved it by creating "the
> framework team". This is a rolling body of people who are responsible
> for putting out calls for and reviewing improvements proposals. They
> basically report to the release m
Thank you for the huge effort you expended on this, Martijn.
You are right, with Jim taking a rest from his much-appreciated past
years as leader, no one is in a position to guide the "Zope" name. We
do have community leaders, such as yourself, but they are guiding
other names at the moment
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Lennart Regebro wrote:
> [snip]
>> Sure. But that doesn't mean a steering group is the right solution.
>
> Why not? What do you think is the right solution?
I wonder what Lennart's solution would be too... Taking a page out of
Plone's history:
> I can see a number of al
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> What is going to make us more effective is:
>
> * a recognition of current reality, i.e. the Zope Framework is not the
> same as the Zope 3 application server and it serves a far wider audience.
>
> * leadership
I really couldn't agree more. There's unfortunately a bit
Tres Seaver wrote:
> It is a nightmare, but not one which a KGS can really fix: sometimes
> your project needs its *own* KGS. Honestly, the only safe thing for
> anybody trying to support a large application in production is to run
> their own index, and do the gatekeeping of packages into it the
Hi Chris
> Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project
>
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
> > The Zope Framework project
> > ==
> >
> > :Author: Martijn Faassen
> > :Date: 2009-03-02
> >
> > Introduction
> >
> >
> > This document offers suggestions to reorga
Chris McDonough wrote:
> I'm pretty sure a steering group and a rebranding of existing software is not
> going to make us more effective. Here's what I believe would make us more
> effective:
First of all, I'm not sure what Martijn is saying is necessarily in
dichotomy with what you're saying,
Hi Martijn
> Betreff: [Zope-dev] the Zope Framework project
>
> The Zope Framework project
> ==
>
> :Author: Martijn Faassen
> :Date: 2009-03-02
I generaly agree and give you a big +1 for do something
and get a new fresh drive into our development process.
I probably wi
Hey Tres,
Tres Seaver wrote:
[snip]
>>> - encouraging radical change for experimentation purposes, releasing folks
>>> from
>>> various constraints (backwards compatibility, style policing, historical
>>> ownership)
>> Who is going to make that decision to encourage this? Allow this? You?
>>
Hi Matthew,
Thanks very much for your extensive feedback! Here's some of my feedback.
Matthew Wilkes wrote:
[snip]
>> * if it has a lot of people who contribute to it from our community,
>> it's likely core.
>
> -1, it's a zope community package, but not necessarily part of our
> framework.
Hi there,
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 00:16, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Who is going to make that decision to encourage this? Allow this? You?
>> Me? Who? Right now, *nobody* is making such decisions and nobody can
>> properly get away with saying they allow it. Leadership is a
Hi there,
Tres Seaver wrote:
[snip]
>> Right. That's what I was thinking of. I don't know how much traction
>> it's gotten.
>
> Most of tne non-Zope, non-Django frameworks use it.
Ah, sorry, I missed this line of answering when I answered myself. I
agree it's very popular. I think we could g
Hi there,
Jim Fulton wrote:
> There's been some discussion recently about separating the interfaces
> in zope.publisher from the implementations to facilitate other
> implementations.
>
> I think it would be great to standardize request and response APIs.
> I'd love to see this extend beyo
On 2 Mar 2009, at 16:33, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> What is the Zope project? The Zope project is an umbrella project for
> a number of sub-projects. Its source code is in a repository managed
> by the Zope Foundation. Within the Zope project, there are a number of
> projects that ship full-stack w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Chris McDonough wrote:
> [snip]
>> I'm pretty sure a steering group and a rebranding of existing software is not
>> going to make us more effective.
>
> I'm proposing a deconstruction, not a rebranding; a new n
Lennart Regebro wrote:
[snip]
> Sure. But that doesn't mean a steering group is the right solution.
Why not? What do you think is the right solution?
I can see a number of alternatives:
* a pope that has the leadership role. We had Jim, but the pope's
resting. We could institute a new pope. Who
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 00:16, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Who is going to make that decision to encourage this? Allow this? You?
> Me? Who? Right now, *nobody* is making such decisions and nobody can
> properly get away with saying they allow it. Leadership is a way to get
> out of it.
I think open
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Monday 02 March 2009, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
[snip]
>> 2. Split the Zope 3 KGS into two parts: the Zope Framework bits and the
>> Zope 3 Application Server bits.
>
> I prefer (2) as I told Martijn in a review of an early draft of the proposal.
> I would also sign up
On Monday 02 March 2009, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> If you say we shouldn't maintain a known good set, then other systems
> building on top of this will need to maintain their independent lists
> all by themselves, and there's less chance that Zope 2's, Zope 3's and
> Grok's list will agree. I think
Hi there,
I just realized the irony in this:
[Martijn spends a lot of time in trying to solve problems in our
community, bothering to consult lots of people and writing up a document]
[Chris]
> I'm pretty sure a steering group and a rebranding of existing software is not
> going to make us more
Hi there,
To people who are suggesting we don't need a steering group nor a name
for the Zope Framework, please answer the following questions:
* how will the community make hard decisions where lots of people
disagree? What is the mechanism for making hard decisions? Don't say Jim
makes them
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
[snip]
> The "Zope Framework" as defined as zope.* is far less than Zope2
> requires itself. zope.app.testing, zope.app.component, zope.app.form,
> zope.app.publisher and friends are all used and incur a major buy into
> the Zope3 Application Server today.
Hm, zope.* in my
Hi there,
Tres Seaver wrote:
[snip]
> It is a nightmare, but not one which a KGS can really fix: sometimes
> your project needs its *own* KGS.
Sure, that's fine. Grok has its own KGS. And we want reuse. Grok reuses
Zope 3's KGS as it doesn't want to do all the research itself and only
diverge
Hi there,
Chris McDonough wrote:
[snip]
> I'm pretty sure a steering group and a rebranding of existing software is not
> going to make us more effective.
I'm proposing a deconstruction, not a rebranding; a new name is
introduced as an entity needs to be named, namely the Zope Framework.
What
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 00:05, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> - A steering group for the framework? Euhm? I don't know. I think
>> release managers are needed, and I think a steering group is going to
>> grow out of the community. Having an offical steering group t
On Monday 02 March 2009, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> This however does not mean, that individual packages should be tightly
> pressed into the needs of such consumers of them. The overhead of
> tracking incompatible changes, creating maintenance branches where
> required and releasing maintenance re
On Monday 02 March 2009, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> As the proposed release cycles of both 3.5 and 2.12 are in sync at this
> point in time, we have actually two options from the point of Zope2:
>
> 1. Merge the KGS information into one. We do have the same kind of
> policies for handling backwards
Hi there,
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> - A steering group for the framework? Euhm? I don't know. I think
> release managers are needed, and I think a steering group is going to
> grow out of the community. Having an offical steering group tends to
> mean that if they don't do anything nothing gets don
Quick Summary: More committees: -1 Everything else: +lots.
- I like renaming "Zope3, the libraries" to "The Zope Framework". It
makes sense. That part doesn't even need to be official, we can just
start calling it this, and those who doesn't like it can call it Zope3
the libraries, and we'll se w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Mar 2, 2009, at 2:08 PM, Thomas Lotze wrote:
>
>> Jim Fulton wrote:
>>
>>> Speaking for myself, I'd be happy to change my code to comform to a
>>> python-standard request API assuming that it had enough in it to
>>> adapt it
>
Chris McDonough wrote at 2009-3-2 12:11 -0500:
> ...
>I'm pretty sure a steering group and a rebranding of existing software is not
>going to make us more effective.
+ 1
> Here's what I believe would make us more
>effective:
>
>- encouraging radical change for experimentation purposes, releasing
Tres Seaver wrote:
> - How many projects are there which are going to need a "Zope 3.5"
> release (as opposed to updates to some of the packages traditionally
> part of Zope3)? I would bet that this set is smaller than the first.
> For instance, I know that Zope 2.12 *says* it will rely on 3
On Mar 2, 2009, at 2:08 PM, Thomas Lotze wrote:
> Jim Fulton wrote:
>
>> Speaking for myself, I'd be happy to change my code to comform to a
>> python-standard request API assuming that it had enough in it to
>> adapt it
>> to existing APIs.
>
> Without having used it myself yet, and without ma
Jim Fulton wrote:
> Speaking for myself, I'd be happy to change my code to comform to a
> python-standard request API assuming that it had enough in it to adapt it
> to existing APIs.
Without having used it myself yet, and without making any claim about it
being a Python standard, this makes me t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Adam GROSZER wrote:
> I think we need some sort of stering group (or person(s)).
> Without rules and decisions to follow we're going to end up like headless
> chicken running around in the kitchen. Noone knows the direction.
>
> Yes sometimes radical
Hello,
I think we need some sort of stering group (or person(s)).
Without rules and decisions to follow we're going to end up like headless
chicken running around in the kitchen. Noone knows the direction.
Yes sometimes radical changes are good. We're also carrying a lot of old
baggage around wit
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> - focusing on externalizing software; each egg should stand on its own as
> something that a non-Zope person would be able to understand and use
> in isolation. This means documentation for each thing, as well as
> a sane dependency gra
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> The Zope Framework project
> ==
>
> :Author: Martijn Faassen
> :Date: 2009-03-02
>
> Introduction
>
>
> This document offers suggestions to reorganize our community so we can
> act more effectively. It does this by trying to clarify w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Benji York wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Dan Korostelev wrote:
>> Log message for revision 97423:
>> Update package mailing list address. Remove zpkg stuff.
>
>> Deleted: zope.file/trunk/src/zope/file/zope.file-configure.zcml
>>
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Dan Korostelev wrote:
> Log message for revision 97423:
> Update package mailing list address. Remove zpkg stuff.
> Deleted: zope.file/trunk/src/zope/file/zope.file-configure.zcml
> ===
> --- zope.fi
The Zope Framework project
==
:Author: Martijn Faassen
:Date: 2009-03-02
Introduction
This document offers suggestions to reorganize our community so we can
act more effectively. It does this by trying to clarify what our
community is about. The document trie
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Also, is there any caching for already processed packages in the
>> include finder code? If no, I'd probably like to contribute some, if
>> I'll use z3c.autoinclude. :)
>
> Ah, you're thinking in the same direction. I don't think there's an
Hey,
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Ethan Jucovy wrote:
[snip]
> The only times I've used it so far have been just for fun though --
> turning off autoinclusion somewhere to see what breaks. :)
Dan just came up with a good use case for the feature, so now I'm glad
you added it. :) It's useful
Hi there,
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Dan Korostelev wrote:
> 2009/2/26 Martijn Faassen :
[snip]
>> When claims like that are made, I'd like to see measurements that
>> demonstrate significant slowdowns during startup. Undoubtedly more
>> code is excuted than when you write out 'include' dir
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Sun Mar 1 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Mon Mar 2 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Sun Mar 1 20:21:00 EST 2009
URL: http://
59 matches
Mail list logo
