On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 10:37 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: > I'd like to get feedback on two possible visions for the future of > Zope 2 and Zope 3. > > 1) Our current vision (AFAIK) is that Zope 3 will eventually > replace Zope 2 > > - There will be lots of overlap between the Zope 2 and Zope 3 > lifetimes. (Zope 2 might be supported more or less > forever.) > > - Eventually, the gap between Zope 2 and will become very small. > requiring a small leap. > > In this vision, Zope 3 would have to become a lot more like > Zope 2, or we would lose features. -1 >
> 2) In an alternate vision, Zope 2 evolves to Zope 5. > > - Zope 5 will be the application server generally known as Zope. It > will be backward compatible (to the same degree that Zope 2 > releases are currently backward compatible with previous Zope 2 > releases) with Zope 2. Zope 5 will similarly be backward > compatible with Zope 3 applications built on top of the current > Zope 3 application server. > > Note that Zope 5 will leverage Zope 3 technologies to allow a > variety of configurations, including a Zope 2-like configuration > with implicit acquisition and through-the-web development, and a > Zope 3-like configuration that looks a lot like the current Zope > 3 application server. Maybe, there will be a configuration that > allows Zope 2 and Zope 3 applications to be combined to a > significant degree. > > - Zope 3 will explode. :) > > For many people, Zope 3 is first a collection of technologies > that can be assembled into a variety of different applications. > It is second a Zope 2-like application server. I think that > these folks aren't really interested in the (Zope 2-like) > application server. > > Zope 3 will continue as a project (or projects) for creating > and refining these technologies. > > (It would probably make sense for this activity to to have some > name other than "Zope". On some level, the logical name would > be "Z" (pronounced "Zed" :). An argument against "Z" is that > it would be hard to google for, but Google handles such queries > quite well and I'd expect that we'd move to the top of Google Z > search results fairly quickly. However, I'll leave naming > decisions to experts. ;) > > Advantages of this vision: > > - Zope 2 users don't need to leave Zope 2. > > - Zope 3 doesn't have to reproduce all Zope 2 features. > > - There wouldn't be confusion about 2 Zopes. > > It is important that Zope 5 be backward compatible with both Zope 2 > and Zope 3, although not necessarily in the same > configuration. Many people are building Zope 3 applications today > and they should not be penalized. > > Thoughts? +2 I personally think that one of the great things about what has come out of Zope 3 development: other projects can use the technologies without taking Zope 3 lock stock and barrel. I'd hate to see Zope 3 get more girth and loose future traction because it had to be fully backwards compatible with Zope 2. For those who wish to slowly migrate to using Zope 3 technologies without completely rewriting their software, evolving via Five is a fair approach. To quote a blog I'd read earlier today: Doing little things well is a step towards doing big things better. Allowing others to assist in refining the little technologies which make up Zope 3 can achieve this goal. I would fear this would be impossible if the first vision was followed. Andrew Sawyers > > Jim > _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
