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

[Martijn Faassen]

[re-sending this one as it didn't show up on-list earlier]
Jim Fulton wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen 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?

I agree with what Philipp said. That is not so much a reflection on
behavior, but a reflection on perspective and image. This also counts in
the open source world.

For instance, if I check something into cvs.infrae.com or codespeak.net
SVN has a vast difference in image, even though both packages may be
licensed the same way.

>  > The bar for commitment won't be as
> 
>> high as for the zope.org repository (contributor agreement, ZPL etc.), 
> 
> And therein lies a weakness in a separate repository.  The rules:
> 
> - Consistent open license
> 
> - Ony check in your code
> 
> - Don't knowingly violate patents

- Share your copyright with ZC. :)

> protect the user's of the 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 agree that the zope.org repository has significant benefits. It also
has drawbacks. A separate repositority has other drawbacks and strengths
-- strengths that include a lower barrier to entry and a neutral
position. Just by being *different* in its strengths and drawbacks is
helpful by itself, as this may feed some projects into existence that
might otherwise not happen.

I think that the Zope 3 community will be stronger with this second
repository. It's a significant sign of strength of the community itself
to have people develop open source software *for* Zope 3 that can not in
any way be construed to be a *part* of Zope 3.

This is what we see in the Zope 2 community; a plethora of repositories.
The different possibly incompatible licenses and state of
maintainability is a drawback, yes, but it's also a strength -- a
strength in diversity. The Zope 3 community is now expanding.

Regards,

Martijn