Jim Fulton wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Anyway - I hope these perspectives are useful. I'm certainly not
disagreeing
with what you're saying or with the direction you're pointing out. I
think
we just need be mindful that there were some good things about the past
approaches as well as p
Jeff Rush wrote:
Benji York wrote:
Zachery Bir wrote:
I think Benji's commenting on the fact that you're creating a
synchronous connection when you hold it open like that.
Exactly. As Jean-Marc noted, Jeff's talking more about "streaming"
than "asynchronicity" (is that a word?).
Well th
To answer the question at the end of your document: yes. Please
continue on, showing the next smallest possible next step that is
interesting. Hopefully this step can be done with making the viewer
confront interfaces, adapters, etc.
About the middle part, what's really needed to ensure ne
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Paul Everitt wrote:
I still don't think scripters and developers are the same people. I
won't repeat Dan's arguments here, but I think his essay is a valuable
read for understanding an audience that isn't like most zope3-dev people.
Once agai
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
My vision for the WebDev project is that you can develop WebDev
packages using Zope 2 like features, but the result of the Web
development can be generated into a real Python package.
That might work, but the story breaks down if the developer can'
Shane Hathaway wrote:
It is a beautiful story and I dearly want it to work. But the story
currently has major limitations; developers reach a point where they
have to make a big switch, learn numerous libraries, and rewrite a lot
of their code. How can we fix that?
Part of the problem is th
Max M wrote:
Geoff Davis wrote:
Jeff Shell has posted some thought-provoking pieces on his blog that are
relevant to Jim's recent attempt to better articulate a vision for Zope:
http://griddlenoise.blogspot.com/2006/03/zope-crisis-of-faith-coming-this-march.html
http://griddlenoise.blogspot
Geoff Davis wrote:
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:38:03 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great.
Zope 3 is a _huge_ overhaul and it needs to be obvious to the world that
it is dramatically better than crufty old Zope 2. Zope 3 then becomes the
Stefane Fermigier wrote:
Geoff Davis wrote:
I think that the idea of giving Zed its own, distinct identity is great..
I think it is stupid.
We (Zope Corp + the Zope Community) have spent 8 years building the Zope
brand, and you want to restart from scratch ?
Hehe, poor Geoff. :)
In the pas
Jeff Shell wrote:
Yes. There's a dominant Zope name out there. It's not the Component
Architecture nor is it built on it. It's starting to use it, but it's
not based on it. However, since the project that Zope 3 [AS] came out
of is still identified in the Wiki as the 'Component Architecture'
proj
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 3/1/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Does this help with implementing persistent schemas at all?
Maybe, although I feel that the interface-based schemas was a mistake
anyway. It would probably be better to focus energy on making XForms
based schemas, both
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Monday 06 February 2006 20:49, Gary Poster wrote:
How about we have a marketing competition? :-)
+1 from me plus everything else you said below.
Yep, it's a good idea.
--Paul
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Jim Fulton wrote:
At:
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/PublicationPostProcessing
I've put doesn some thoughs for discussion on making the publication APIs
more explicit and for supporting post processing tasks like adding
standard look and feel or adding m
Tim Terlegård wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2005, Paul Everitt wrote:
Z3 ECM Sprint
-
There are several sprints getting organized at EuroPython. The Z3 ECM
team is planning a pretty serious effort to kickstart its activities.
The Z3 ECM sprint starts at noon on Thursday, June 23 and
nt, and more.
o Julien Anguenot ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) will lead a team working on the the
ECM workflow architecture and continue the existing prototype.
Discussion about the WfMC standard and the 3 architecture layers
(xpdcore/wfmc/ecmworkflow) plus the existing work on the Zope 3
trunk is p
Maik Röder wrote:
Hi,
- to unify the whole Zope/CMS-involved community to drastically reduce
waste of resources (doing twice or more equivalent components /
features).
How do you plan to keep the project apart from the interests of Nuxeo?
Although Julien's intro said Paris and on behalf of
16 matches
Mail list logo
