<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 5 July 2011 10:31, Hanno Schlichting <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hanno@hannosch.eu">hanno@hannosch.eu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:19 PM, yuppie <<a href="mailto:y.2011@wcm-solutions.de">y.2011@wcm-solutions.de</a>> wrote:<br>
> Long-term maintenance for Zope 2.13 would give these<br>
> projects/deployments at least a few more years.<br>
<br>
</div>Yes. I'm willing to cut releases for it for quite a while. I just<br>
expect to see active maintenance from the Plone community to stop in a<br>
year or two. Judging from the ongoing maintenance we currently have<br>
for Zope 2.10 or 2.11 I don't think it's very realistic to expect much<br>
to happen once the Plone guys stop.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
>> What I'm outlining here has of course almost nothing to do with the<br>
>> original idea and scope of Zope 2. Maybe at some point this should get<br>
>> a different name ;-)<br>
><br>
> I don't want to discuss names, but I think the next release from Zope<br>
> trunk should be explicitly a new *major* release.<br>
<br>
</div>I think that's perfectly fine. Since I broke backwards compatibility<br>
with a number of changes I did, a major version increase is warranted.<br>
<br>
So we just got ourselves a Zope2 version 3.0. And no, naming it 4.0 or<br>
5.0 or anything else doesn't make it any better at all. So 3.0 is the<br>
most sensible one :)</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Boy, that's going to be confusing. :)</div><div><br></div><div>I'd actually favour calling it Zope2 4.0 just to avoid any mix-up with the defunct Zope 3, although I don't think there are any particularly good options here.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Martin</div></div>