[ZWeb] Zope.org - take 3?
pw_lists at slinkp.com
Tue Jan 25 11:01:36 EST 2005
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 10:23:38AM +0000, Chris Withers wrote:
> I would be happy to head up this effort, and I'm prepared to commit 1
> day a week for both February and March to working on Zope.org and
> managing the effort of those prepared to help. All I ask in return would
> be authority from someone who can grant it to yes/no things that I'm
> helping with (to avoid endless discussions that go nowhere) and the
> right to produce a case study of the project for my company's website.
> Who's in a positon to say yes or no to these requests?
not I. I have no objection in principle to the idea of a small
working group. Unfortunately I'm overcommitted and I'm thinking
of quitting this list as I've had zero positive contributions
to it in recent memory :-(
I wasn't going to respond to this thread, but hey, you insisted ;-)
> 3. Totally focussed on software, NOT content.
> 4. Aim at building the site with as simply as possible, using no fancy
> new software, and sticking to the absolute bare minimum to make it work
> fast. If fanciness is needed, let it be in error reporting and site
> logging domain, rather than "cool new features".
dunno what you mean. Do you think zope.org has too many features?
> 5. Have an SVN checkout of the instance home of the storage server and
> each of the app clients (the client would probably be branched off a
> common base, with only the config files being different) so that people
> can checkout the software on a local machine and develop stuff using the
> usual branch-and-merge model.
somehow i thought that something like this existed
already, but I don't recall hte specifics.
> 6. Enable all "system" software (eg: python, zope, cmf) to be easily
> upgraded as needed, so the latest bugfixes can be used as soon as possbible.
+1, but I'd be wary of upgrading too eagerly unless the intention
is for zope.org to serve as a dogbowl.
Consider e.g. the recently reported problems with AccessControl under
> 7. (maybe) a functional test suite that actually tests all the
> functional aspects we're aiming to support. Does anyone have lots of
> experience producing functional test suites?
not me, but ZopeTestCase should help.
If resources allowed me to devote time to this,
I would bump this up from "maybe" to "definitely" and do it first
before changing anything.
More information about the Zope-web