srichter at cosmos.phy.tufts.edu
Tue Nov 22 20:08:32 EST 2005
On Tuesday 22 November 2005 19:34, Milind Khadilkar wrote:
> Is it correct to say that one of the major objectives of Zope 3 as opposed
> to zope-x ( viz. compatibility with Zope 2, or at least an easy way for
> importing products from zope 2) has not been achieved? The 'x' was removed
> on grounds of being ready for production use, not on grounds of
> compatibility. The release announcement for 3.1 also mentions continuing
> efforts to ease transition from zope 2 to zope 3. Is it meant to be the
> same as "ability to import products"?
My opinion is that you will never be able to import your Zope 2 product as a
packge in plain Zope 3. HAving said that, there are continuous efforts, such
as Five and Goldegg, to bring Zope 3 technology into Zope 2.
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
More information about the Zope3-users