[Framework-Team] Re: Plone 3.2 plans
hannosch at hannosch.eu
Sun Aug 3 17:37:40 UTC 2008
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>> The packaging goal we want to achieve is to move to a fully eggified
>> What isn't eggified yet?
> The products currently still in the 3.2 ploneout are: CMFActionIcons
> CMFCalendar, CMFDefault, CMFDiffTool, CMFEditions, CMFPlacefulWorkflow,
> CMFTopic, CMFUid, DCWorkflow, GroupUserFolder and PloneTranslations.
> I expect that we'll be able to have eggified versions of these in a week
> as well.
A week was a bit pessimistic here, products are gone from the 3.2 branch!
>> Also - what about Zope itself? I know Andreas is kean to move Zope 2 to
>> all eggs soon (and make use of Zope 3.4, which is all eggs). It may make
>> sense to co-ordinate here, since a fully eggified CMF/Plone is really
>> only half the picture.
> This will be a topic for the black forest sprint in August. I
> eggification of Zope to be a goal for Zope 2.12, which means we won't be
> able to benefit of that for some time. In the meantime we should use the
> fake-zope-eggs option of plone.recipe.zope2install.
I have just signed up for helping out on Zope 2 eggification on that
sprint as well. I'm sure we can get there for Zope 2.12. If we are able
to make a Zope 2.11 release as an egg, is yet to be decided. 2.10 is
definitely not going to see an official egg release anymore.
>> I think we're due a "new features" process. Perhaps we could start
>> soliciting PLIPs for 3.3 and get the review process organised at the
>> same time that we package up 3.2. I presume 3.2 won't have any PLIPs to
>> review (well, maybe one or two package related ones) in any case.
> For 3.2 I only want to look at PLIPs that deal with installers. There
> are two PLIPs listed for 3.2 at the moment. 229 is purely an installer
> extension and should be easily doable, especially since I already
> implemented almost the same thing for the Jarn Plone hosting
> environment. 230 is borderline but I'm willing to look at it if it is
> done in the form of an optional new package.
3.2: I gave my comments on plone.org on the two PLIP's in question.
3.3: I should probably start writing my own PLIP's soon :)
More information about the Framework-Team