[BlueBream] BlueBream TTW

[Joshua Immanuel]

Hello Stephan,

Thanks for your kind mail.

It was very helpful indeed.

Regards
Joshua

On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 21:10 -0400, Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 28, 2012 12:17:12 PM Joshua Immanuel wrote:
> > I see almost everyone in this mailing list are from Zope 2 background.
> > There are some unanswered questions on my mind. I would be very grateful
> > if someone enlightens me on this.
> 
> That's because the people that started Zope 3 (including me) wanted to change 
> the short-comings of Zope 2. 
> 
> > Why people haven't moved from Zope 2. Even worse, they continue their
> > development towards Zope 4.
> 
> Because Plone is built on it. And Plone is still one of the most popular OSS 
> projects out there. Zope 4 will be basically the bare bones of Zope 2 that is 
> needed for Plone to keep running.
> 
> > The glory of Bluebream is (seemingly) fading out rapidly in spite of its
> > well designed architecture. Why? (Or is it just my perception)
> 
> Well, Bluebream is one configuration to build an app server using the various 
> toolkits. Unfortunately, for whatever reason Christophe and Baju are not 
> driving its development as hard anymore. That said, I use the library stack 
> all the time and so does Zope Corp. We simply do not start with the Bluebream 
> recipes, but build out own buildout.cfg and application.zcml.
> 
> > Is there any major downfalls in bluebream or in other words, are there
> > any added merits in Zope 2 that makes people to stick to it (other than
> > the fact that Plone is based on it).
> 
> No, not architecturally. Zope 3 does have a cleaner architecture than Zope 2, 
> which sometimes makes it for people harder to grasp at first. Though I have 
> recently started to work with someone coming from the Java Web framework world 
> and he has no trouble dealing with Zope 3's component architecture. ;-)
> 
> > If so many bluebream (ZTK) features are backported (or used) in Zope 2.
> > Then we might as well merge them completely and have the benefits of
> > both and eradicate the shortcomings in them. Is that feasible?
> 
> No. The overhead that Zope 2 imposes would be unacceptable to me. You really 
> have to build a Zope 2 and Bluebream "Hello World" app and you will understand 
> the reasons quickly.
> 
> Regards,
> Stephan

-- 
Joshua Immanuel
HiPro IT Solutions Private Limited
http://hipro.co.in
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/bluebream/attachments/20120319/8e05da18/attachment.sig>