[Zope3-dev] Re: Can we provide a Zope3 Collective?

[Jim Fulton]

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Jim Fulton wrote:
> 
>>> As for new packages, especially ones that come from outside the core 
>>> development team around ZC, I wouldn't say that the zope.org 
>>> repository would be the best place. We eventually would like to 
>>> enforce and furtherly support cooperation between different 
>>> communities, such as Silva and Plone; a "neutral" place to do this 
>>> sounds like a much better idea to me (and others, frankly).
>>
>>
>> In what way is zope.org not neutral?
> 
> 
> - Because it is maintained by ZC.
> 
> (It was only at EP I have heard that ZC is looking for people from the 
> community to help out. It still hasn't happened, afaik.)

1. I don't see how us maintaining it makes it less neutral.
    Is there any evidence that we are being unfair.

2. There are a number of community volunteers who
    will be taking over increasing amounts of the management
    of the site.

> - ZC is a competitor in the field.

And is anyone who might run a collective not a competitor?

Does this matter? Why?  You seem to be worried about some sort
of FUD and I can't figure out why. I could understand if we are
missbehaving. I know you're a good guy and your intention is not
FUD, bit that's what this is.

There are legitmate issues around license, IP and liability.
I think they are worth thinking about. There are tradeoffs
involved. I don't blame someone for not putting software in
the Zope repository for one of these reasons, at least after
understanding the tradeoffs. But can we place stop this neutrality
silliness.  I think it is *really* counter productive and,
frankly, I find it petty insulting.

> - IP is assigned to ZC in half. *That* is probably the most un-neutral 
> things of all.

If that is really a sticking point for someone, then they should go
elsewhere.  I don't really see that it should be, but I understand if
someone feels differently.


> Plone chose GPL, thus could never have been part of zope.org, not even a 
> subpackage.

And I think they did a disservice to themselves and the rest of us by
doing so.

 > I'm not advocating GPL, but zope.org takes away the freedom
> of free licensing.

Right. If you *really* want that sort of freedom, then you shouldn't
put your stuff in the Zope repository.

But if you choose a different license, you put up a barrier to
adoption of your software.

...

>> Further, for products without
>> external dependencies, including them in the zope.org
>> repository will cause them to be tested and refactored by the Zope
>> developers. This is a *significant* bemefit for developers.
> 
> 
> I think that's an idealistic point of view. If this repository will grow 
> (and I'm certain it will do so tremendously), each patch to Zope3 will 
> increasingly be harder to checkin because it is more likely to break 
> something in one of those external packages.

That's a good thing.

 > Under those circumstances,
> people will loose interest in refactoring and thus improving Zope3.

Perhaps it would be a good thing if the people who were turned off by
this sort of thing stopped contributing.

We are entering a new phase of Zope 3's life.  Backward compatability
is now *very* important.

> Furthermore, the zope.org repository has a strict "all tests must pass" 
> policy. I think it's good for Zope3 and its immediate sattelite 
> projects. But when you're actively developing something, rapidly that 
> is, you might not care about working code for the moment; you might not 
> care about tests for the time being. People sometimes need to do things 
> quick and dirty, even though the development policy of Zope3 itself 
> isn't like that all.

Then use a branch.  Or, if you want the freedom to produce
low-quality software, then, by all means, put your software
somewhere else. ;)

> Moreover, an independent project base allows us to do be much more 
> sponaneous, IMO. "You need a wiki, need a bugtracker, need a 
> mailinglist? Sure, let me do it for you..." z3 base is about community 
> self-organization, which zope.org is utterly lacking.

I'm sorry to hear you say that.  zope.org has always been about
supporting self organization. Is this really a zope.org issue?

Jim

-- 
Jim Fulton           mailto:jim at zope.com       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org