[Framework-Team] Re: PLIPs 208 and 217 Ready for Review
lists at tomster.org
Fri Feb 1 13:11:38 UTC 2008
i'd like to make a case for 'building the plone brand' not only for
the integrator/user audience (as we already are doing) but also for
the develeoper audience. let's not be too shy or modest here. borg is
as 'plonish' in regard to its cleanliness, documentation,
extensibility etc. as it gets (naturally, with martin being the
author). i think it could make sense to convey this by using the plone
namespace for it and i'm sure there are other packages, too.
coming up with eccentric namespaces in the beginning of a new
product's lifecycle is a good idea (we'd have to have three
plone.commenting products right now, otherwise, none of which is
finished...) but eventually i'd think it's a good idea to 'bless' a
package and bring it into the plone namespace. otherwise we'll just
'dilute our brand' for the developer audience.
of course, i'm still all for integrating 3rd party tools (and keeping
their name, of course!) but to 'simulate diversity' by letting our own
packages keep their initial, non-plone name when integrating them into
plone core doesn't strike me as particularly desirable (or
straightforward, for that matter), either.
just my $0,02 and i'd love to know what you guys think about it...
On Feb 1, 2008, at 1:41 PM, Andreas Zeidler wrote:
> On Feb 1, 2008, at 12:31 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> -1 to renaming everthing plone.*. When things begin outside Plone
>> (which we should encourage), then we can't necessarily insist that
>> they are called plone.* (in fact, we'd probably discourage it if it
>> wasn't intended to be eventually destined for the core).
> i completely agree. furthermore, i think using non plone.* packages
> in plone emphasizes one of the points made in the whole wsgi/repoze
> approach and the plone. (as opposed to plone.app.) namespace, which
> is that re-usability is a good thing and we'd like other people
> outside the plone/zope universe to start looking and potentially
> using our stuff as well. in that sense i think we should actually
> make a statement by integrating packages from the "outside world".
> and yes, that's not particularly true in this case, but at least it
> looks this way... ;)
> zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - info at zitc.de
> friedelstraße 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779
> pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/
> plone 3.0.5 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone
> Framework-Team mailing list
> Framework-Team at lists.plone.org
More information about the Framework-Team