On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 10:22 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: > Martijn Faassen wrote: > > > > Just splitting stuff up into little flexible pieces won't attract > > people. If our goal is to attract Zope 3 developers we need to make it > > easy to get started. We can also say that Zope 3 is componentized and > > flexible and all that, and this will attract developers too, but if the > > first bit is too hard all our talk about flexibility will lead to nothing. > > > > So, we need to do both: make it easy to get started, and componentizing > > for greater flexibility later. If we just do the first, we make Zope 2 > > style mistakes and end up with a monolithic system that should be easier > > to develop with. If we just do the latter, we make Zope 3 style mistakes > > and end up with a well componentized system that isn't used a lot. > > Agreed, we need both. We should understand though that the thing I'm > calling (soley for the sake of discussion) is probably not a good > starting point. IMO, it could be if someone was working on it. > I also think that it would be a find project on it's own. Or maybe > there's another project that would serve better. I don't know.
I'm coming in to this discussion very late but if one goal is to enable the creation of OFS-like applications on top of an OFS-less application server, does anyone have recipes for building the latter that could be used as a starting point? - Michael R. Bernstein michaelbernstein.com _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
