[Zope-dev] Plone vs. Zope2 was: Re: naming Zope

[Tres Seaver]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2009, at 11:34 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:

> Plone could run on something like the "Zope Framework" without running  
> on Zope 2.

That would be feasible, except that a ton of Plone's features depend on
Zope2-specific machinery.  Hanno may be ambitious enough to pull that
off (he is certainly capable), but I'm not sure it would be worth the
effort.

> Alternatively, Zope (2 or whatever) could use more and more Zope  
> framework components so that it would become what they mean by Zope 3.

Zope2 has been doing just that for the past four years.  We need to
recognize and bless this fact, and quit using a brand name which creates
an expectation that "Zope2" is an evolutionary dead end.

>>> Plone is going to continue to use selected Zope libraries as everyone
>>> else, but use Repoze or just general Python packages from all over.
>>> Personally I want to move Plone from zope.i18n to Babel for  
>>> example. We
>>> are not bound by names or frameworks in our package choices.
>> Note that unless you scrap the entire model of a Plone site as an
>> application object hosted inside an appserver, you won't have a choice
>> except to run atop Zope2:  the Z3 appserver is going to be even more
>> moribund a year from now than it is today.
> 
> I don't agree at all with your definition of app server.

I'm using the term pretty much as a cognate for your "pluggable
application," or for "bean container" in the Java world;  an application
server is a standalone thing which has separately-developed
"applications" installed into it.

The other Python "web frameworks" now current don't match this pattern
at all:  they give you a way to build and run a custom web application
under a WSGI server, but there is no notion of "installing an
application" into the server.  The server also provides almost *no*
functionality to the application, by comparison with what Zope2 does.

>> Z2 is at least *interesting* to work with at this point;  making the  
>> Z3 appserver WSGI'fied will be hard and pointless by comparison.
> 
> Zope 3 has been wsgi-based for years now.

In a sense, yes, although the stock publisher is too policy filled to
take advantage of a lot of the benefits of a WSGI-fied environment.


Tres.
- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tseaver at palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJ3haQ+gerLs4ltQ4RAu7iAJ9cVi3qe4p7tOZuN6+b7DpKu+64/wCgyGhr
lT1hpyXcgU86WLGD5OsRJow=
=nDBR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----