[Framework-Team] Re: Zope versions

Rob Miller ra at burningman.com
Mon Apr 10 18:49:54 UTC 2006

On Apr 9, 2006, at 3:42 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:

> On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 23:30:51 +0100, Hanno Schlichting  
> <plone at hannosch.info> wrote:
>> Well, Zope 2.8 vs. 2.9 is a special case, as it is really Zope  
>> X3.0 vs.
>> 3.2, which is a 0.2 step and at least one year of extra development.
> True. But Zope 3 refactors a lot, and moves very fast. We may be  
> biting off more than we can chew even between one-step versions,  
> which will be backwards compatible, but spew deprecation warnings.

i don't understand this concern at all, frankly.  deprecation  
warnings we can deal with.

>> Right now I'm actually +1 on changing the recommend platform for  
>> Plone
>> 2.5 to Zope 2.9 and including this in the installers. My main  
>> argument
>> here is that we want to advertise using new development strategies  
>> based
>> on Zope3. But if we get people to start with Zope X3.0 lots of  
>> what they
>> do is not only deprecated but actually removed in current Zope3. So I
>> wouldn't want to advertise this. If I currently work on something
>> depending on Zope3, I look in the Zope 2.9 version first and after I
>> have it working there, I look if it works on Zope 2.8 as well.  
>> This kind
>> of practice is something we cannot seriously communicate. And  
>> after all
>> Plone 2.5 is a infrastructure release ;)

i'm +0 on including Z2.9 with the installers.  it'd be great, but i  
don't know enough about the risks to formulate an informed opinion.   
however, i'm a big +1 on having a large number of add-on products  
require Z2.9.  this will force anyone who wants to use the groovy new  
tools that are being built to upgrade.  maybe we could have binary  
installers of each flavor, to help out those who'd want to upgrade  
but who only install from binaries.


More information about the Framework-Team mailing list