[Zope] comment on posting behavior

[Bill Anderson]

"Guy N. Hurst" wrote:
> 
> J C Lawrence wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > I would much rather have "likely to be correct" answers posted to
> > the list than no answers posted at all.  If some level of confusion
> > is the result of that, so be it.  I'm sure the confused (of which
> > I'm often one) can learn to ignore the "I haven't tested this" posts
> > if they really need to.
> >
> 
> This is only to underscore the fact that Zope is not ready for prime
> time.
> It goes beyond just posting untested results.
> 
> Something like Perl or PHP would have definitive, known answers for most
> all issues. Resident experts are scattered everywhere. It is like taking
> your broken-down vehicle to a certified mechanic, and getting it fixed.

If you believe Perl and/or PHP has everything all figured out, with
'definitive, known answers', you have indeed been sold a line by
someone, and it isn't Zopesters.

No single language or platform has the answers to everthing. Ask 50
'resident experts'  in Perl how to do a given task, and you'll get 75
different answers. Take a trip to the CGI archive sites, and you'll find
many somewhat simple tasks done in dozens of ways. If the above
paragraph is your definition of 'ready for prime time', Perl, PHP, C,
C++, Java, Shell, are all not ready for prime time.

 
> MY OPINION
> The problem with Zope is, hardly anyone seems to know what is really
> going on under the hood (but hey, you're not supposed to need to know),
> and it is too often that it is left to anyone's guess why something
> doesn't work - or even why it in fact does work a certain way. No one is
> certified, and no one claims to be, either. It is like the wild west,

And 'certification' solves ills? I emphatically disagree with both the
idea that only few know what is 'going on under the hood', and that one
isn't supposed to know. The vast array of answers, the increasing number
of How-Tos and Products stand in staunch opposition to your claim.  Ever
examined the Perl or PHP source code? Do think very many of the
'experts' in these have?

> too, because no one's work is sheriffed in a manner to maintain order.
> And there are plenty of enthusiasts setting up their homestead, willing
> to endure these hardships. (Can be pretty exciting, you know).

If you check the credential of many of the Zope contributors, I'd put up
money that they are far more than 'enthusiasts'.
 
> I think only a hobbyist can maintain the excitement of enduring all the
> pitfalls, traps, and rewarding features that can be discovered. It is
> really like an adventure -- if you have the time and desire.

That line of reasoning says that business cannot come up with, or
maintain usefull, creative software. Something tells me this line of
reasoning falls down. Perhaps it is experience, showing me the opposite
is true.
 
> But I am not a hobbyist, and to tell you the truth, I am just plain
> fed up. I am being sold a pan and a shovel while hearing claims of gold.

No one is twisting your arm. Nowhere do I see _anyone_ making claims
like this. 
YOU chose to support/use Zope if your clients desired it. Nobody here is
forcing you to do it.

> Sure, there is gold - but no one is going to give it to you.
> **But the hype is that it IS being given to you.**

Where _exactly_ is this 'hype' coming from? References, please.

> That would only apply if you needed some simple things.
> Some things that fit the mold of what Zope can readily offer.
> Whoever you may be, I insist you stop hyping Zope to the point of
> making false and misleading claims, even if only implicitly.

I would _ask_ you refrain from insisting 'we' stop doing that which we
are not doing. Consider the possibility that you misinterpreted what is
available. It happens frequently (generally speaking here). We see
something new, it is exciting, growing, and offers new ways of doing
things; suddenly it is 'the holy grail', especially witn dealing with
'implicit' claims. Implication, like elegance, is often in the mind of
the receiver.
 
> It goes from being simple-and-easy, to
> do-it-yourself-you're-on-your-own.
> It goes from being a well-thought-out system, to guess-the-syntax-today.
> It goes from being cross-platform-support to
> oh-we-don't-actually-use-IIS.
> It goes from having community-contributed-solutions to
> community-spread-bugs.
> It goes from open-source application server to
> oh-you-have-to-pay-for-THAT.
> It goes from you-don't-need-to-know-python to
> you-should-really-know-python.
> It goes from you-can-always-use-external-methods to
> you-shouldn't-use-external-methods.
> It goes from we're-ready-now to we're-working-on-it.
> It goes from reduced-code-management to
> increased-server-resources-management.
> ..etc!
> 
> I am tired of the enthusiasm now, because on closer inspection, I have
> found plainly false and misleading claims. Even by well-meaning people.
> And it has to do with ignorance of how Zope actually works. But
> supposedly you don't need to know! I say baloney.

Again, show where people have claimed one isn't supposed to know? The
fact that Zope is open source, stands in stark contrast to this claim. 

> All the enthusiastic things I have come across only really apply to a
> subset of the features I would actually need to implement, anyway.

So implement them your ownself. This is open source after all. excercise
a little personal initiative, and the responsisbility that comes with
being a developer. you claim to be a zope developer, do it. Developer
make things, not whine that no one else has already made a product that
mets their specific needs.
 
> Sure, there are things to be excited about. But just because Zope
> exceeds by 1000% the capabilities of some commercial applications in a
> few areas, does not mean it does so in the other areas businesses rely
> on!!

And this statement applies equally to PHP, CGI, <insert web-related
thing here>.

> Besides the baloney, are the half-baked answers given as bread to eat.
> 
> Instead of seeing well-measured, sensible analyses of this, I see
> people saying "so-and-so survived the slashdot effect, so it must be

Since you jumped streams, I'l have to assume you are now talking about
the traffic capabilities of Zope. To claim that none have posted any
measured analyses of Zope's capabilities and gotchas in this arena is to
be completely ignorant of what has been posted here, or intentional
dishonesty. A quick search of the archives will reveal several postings
with hard data.

> good", "haven't heard of any problems with high-traffic sites",
> "shouldn't have any problems", "FAST CGI is the way to go", etc.,
> whereas Perens' site had almost no graphics, DC really DOES know of a
> high-traffic site having problems, the list is FULL of reported
> problems, and FAST CGI isn't supported on NT for free.

You expect DC to support Zope on everthing in all situations for free?
 
> And I could spend hours giving many more examples.

I have seen absolutely one vague example.
 
> I AM FED UP.


The I suggest you have a heart to heart discussion with this individual
that is blowing smoke in your direction, not virulently attack a
community of developers _giving_ away their knowledge, time, and fruits
of their efforts.

> And I am not the only one, either.
> 
> And the few experts who are contributing their knowledge to the list
> are not making up for it all.
> 
> There really is misinformation about the virtues of Zope abounding.
> Unfortunately, it is just misinformation. It really cannot do as many
> things as are claimed/suggested/hinted/implied.
> Some of the posts people make to help others are based on this
> misinformation.

Every subject has people trying to help people with less than perfect
answers. If you are expecting different, the problem is on your side,
not the fault of the folks at DC, nor the fault of the many volunteers
giving of themselves. Take a trip to the cesspool of misinformation that
is comp.lang.perl.
 
> Zope is supposed to be easy and do all the work for me,

No, it is not. Never have I seen any claims that it is.

> so I can just
> drop in pre-made products/modules/classes or whatever.
> You know, assemble-your-own-site.

Again, absolutely zero times have I seen anyone make this claim. Indeed,
you are the first.

> Well, you really can't do that! Not easily. Not using all the
> capabilities I was hoping. Not in a reasonable amount of time.

And you expect others to do all your work? Every individual's needs are
different. As a result, not a single environment or software product can
_ever_ fulfill your expectations.
 
> Yes, this is my opinion, but it is based on my experience.
> 
> Reusability in Zope turns out, in many cases, to be no easier - and in
> fact, harder - than reusing code in Perl, PHP, or other languages where
> the system is being made by an expert in his field.

I will submit your alleged experience is just that, alleged.  An example
of code reuse:

<dtml-var standard_html_header>

There, I just resused several functions, and much work on several of my
sites.
It simply doesn't get any easier than that. In many ways it is even
easier than: 
'use CGI.pm ' for example, or #include <errno.h>.

> It seems that, when there are problems in Zope, expertise is still
> required. But that seems to defeat the point of why Zope is being

And where does one turn to when having problems with <insert language
here>? 


> Zope is no better than any other system requiring an expert.
> Actually, it's worse. Zope framework seems too complex and changable to
> have any sort of resident expert to begin with. You'd have to know
> all the Products, etc., which are not held to any sort of standard.
> I may as well develop my own system than assemble parts of things with
> unknown, unpredictable surprises in store.

You have yet to show any evidence of this claim, and have yet to show
any evidence that your personal preferences of Perl and PHP are any
better in these regards. In fact, I will submit that perl, with it's
thousand ways of doing a single, simple task is far, far worse. To be
able to support other people's code, you have to learn these thousands
of other ways of doing the same thing.

But you see, you are making a critical error in all of your arguments
when you compare Zope to perl or php. Apples and oranges. Perl is a
_scripting_language_. So is PHP. Zope is not  language.
 
> Why am I saying this? To counter those with unbounded/misguided
> enthusiasm for something which is not worthy of it. And maybe to prevent
> some other people from turning sour after not keeping their cool when
> the claims turn out to be just a bunch of hot air.

...sounds very trollish...
 
> Zope may not be suitable for things more complex than weblogs and news
> syndication, and maybe internal workflow solutions. Zope can certainly
> handle such purposes with ease. Its XML capabilities certainly hold
> value. Among other things.
> But that doesn't make it a killer app.

I have deployed a number of complex sites for a large corporation that
far outweight your examples in the complexity department. Just because
_you_ can't or have not doen so does not mean Zope cannot be used to do
so.
 
> In any case, it seems to me that the posting behavior problem is related
> to the claims made about Zope versus the problems inherent to Zope, and

All that you have described in terms of posting 'behaviour' are
prevalent (indeed are held as virtues) in others such as the perl
community.

> the kinds of groups of people who have taken to using it with
> dedication.
> 
> While DC may not be responsible for the misleading and /or clueless
> claims of Zope followers, their business will probably end up suffering
> for it in the long run.

Not likely, since you are first I have ever even heard of that makes
these claims, let alone see anyone performing these actions. Perl has
literally thousands of clueless advocates and clueless claims, yet you
don't see it falling victim.
 
> Comments?  Is anyone else fed up?

I don't mean for this to sound like an attack, but I  believe, based
upon your posting, that the expectations you had were a result of your
interpretation. After searching various mailing list collections for
posts with "hurst" in them anywhere, I see very little to support your
claims. I see no preaching to you about how Zope is the end-all-be-all
to websites. I see no posts from you asking for assistance. In fact, I
see precisely four posts from you, counting this one. I see no posts in
reply to, or containing yours, that come _anywhere_ near your claims of
ignorance and proseletyzing. In fact, I see the opposite.

In fact, I do see on another list, you having done some of the very
things you whine about in this post, in regards to PHP. 

If you don't ask for help, no one can help. I
IMO, if you don't want to pay for support, and you don't ask the people
who will willingly answer your questions to the best of their ability,
you lose any rights to whine, insult,  and lambaste them.

While I am sure there may be persons on this list who will disapprove of
what may seem to be 'heavy handed' comments in this post, I will stand
by them. Few thinkgs irritate me more than the attitude displayed in
your post.

-- 
In flying I have learned that carelessness and overconfidence are 
usually far more dangerous than deliberately accepted risks. 
          -- Wilbur Wright in a letter to his father, September 1900