[Zope3-dev] Package is the wrong name for the things I called "Zope Packages".

[Shane Hathaway]

Tres Seaver wrote:
 > On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 15:41, Shane Hathaway wrote:
 >>It's still important to be able to change installed software, but that
 >>is generally an activity only for developers of that software, so it
 >>doesn't need to be lightweight--but it shouldn't be as heavy as it is in
 >>CMF, either.
 >
 > I'm not actually convinced of that;  having downstream consumers modify
 > the software can be an anti-goal for *lots* of situations, so making it
 > harder can be a win.  If you *do* make it easier to modify "closed"
 > software, then you *must* make resolving conflicting changes easier than
 > I foresee us having resources to tackle in the near term.

Well, yes, how can I disagree with that? :-)

Yet as I see it, there's a lot of value in giving end users the ability
to do development-like tasks without knowing anything about
development--not even Python.  End users might make some customizations,
package them up, and give a package to their friends.  Their friends
further modify the package.  The first user doesn't want to be a
distributor, doesn't know about version control, and probably doesn't
mind if there are conflicts.  These buddies will e-mail updates to each
other, just like people e-mail PHP scripts to each other today.  E-mail
makes conflicts resolution difficult, but for ad-hoc uses, it doesn't
matter.

But I realize now that's not in scope.  I thought it was.  Oh well. 
It's an itch I can't quite scratch. :-)  I don't mind much though, 
because this isn't as high a priority as customization.

Shane