To construct a Zope skyscraper on Fedora

[Nathaniel McCallum]

On 06/20/2010 12:54 AM, Chen Lei wrote:
>> I agree, we've got lots to talk about.  The most important things are:
>> 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
>> dependencies.
>>
>> Nathaniel
>> _______________________________________________
>
> 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?

Nathaniel