On 06/20/2010 12:54 AM, Chen Lei wrote:
> I agree, we've got lots to talk about. The most important
> 1. Packaging guidelines
> 2. Component upgrade guidelines
> 3. Namespace issues (addressed above)
> 4. Zope 2 vs Zope 3 (again, addressed above)
> I think we should talk sooner rather than later. Anyone want to setup a
> meeting time?
> Just an FYI, it is my current plan (probably because I am completely
> ignorant as to how much pain this will cause) is to simply package the
> latest version of all Zenoss dependencies and then work through whatever
> bugs I find. I'm in a somewhat unique situation though in that I have
> the ability to commit to upstream. This may be a less than ideal plan
> for other applications.
> As I mentioned to Jonathan on IRC, I think the best plan is to try to
> get something working'ish as soon as possible and then try to shakedown
> the details from there. If we bog ourselves down in policy (an easy
> quagmire to get stuck in when in zopeland) we may get too discouraged to
> continue. Not to dismiss what will be the very needed policy, I just
> want to make sure no-one gets burned out.
> One thing we may want to consider is a "tenant" policy. That is, the
> zope stack as a whole has "tenants" (Zenoss, Plone, etc). The tenants
> would be formally defined and any upgrade to any component in the
> platform would require signoff from all the tenants who depend on that
> component (or some derivation thereof). I suspect that the short-term
> trade-off of buildouts/bundling is not as valuable as the long-term
> value of testing a software product across multiple versions of its
I suggest to stop of submitting package review for zope components
first before we complete the wiki page and treat all of the above
issues(mainly dependencies and namespace issue), we have a lot of time
to do so. F14 is targeting python2.7, we still need to wait this. Hope
most of those components can be compatible with python2.7.
FYI, zope2 can co-exist with zope3, but plone4 can't co-exist with
plone3(plone4 is an update for plone3).
We also need to set up a maillist like other SIG to talk zope-related issues.
I have not submitted any zope packages for review, currently they are
living in my own git repo. When I say "get something working" I mean in
a separate repo. Once we have something working and with good standards
learned from actual practice, we can figure out a merge strategy.
I do suspect someone is going to have to port zope2 to python 2.7. In
fact, I think we should focus on those packages using CPython right now
and make sure they work on 2.6 and 2.7. Pure python is a bit easier.
Who can setup a Zope SIG mailing list?