[Pkg-zope-developers] plone/plone-site, and doing the obvious

[Fabio Tranchitella]

Il giorno mer, 05/04/2006 alle 17.04 +0200, Jürgen A. Erhard ha scritto:
> [Sorry for the duplicate, Fabio, but I just hit R, so... the list
> needs a copy (like a hole in the head, I'm sure ;) ]

No problem (by the way, I belive that "Slaves of Zope" is not the right
name of the list).

> I think a short (two lines or so) note in the long description would
> be better.  Since then people who actually want a plone site don't
> install the (then) unneeded plone package.  And less frustration too:
> install plone, nothing works, finally they find README.Debian and then
> have to install *another* package.

Ok, I'll do so.

> BTW, why does plone-site Suggest plone?  Wouldn't the other way around
> make more sense?  Combined with a "if you want a ready-to-work-with
> Plone instance, install plone-site" comment in the long description...

plone depends on zope-cmfplone and recommends some optional zope
products which you can use or not. For this reason, plone-site depends
on zope-cmfplone and suggests plone which in turn depends on additional
products (eg. multilingual support using zope-linguaplone +
zope-plonelanguagetool, external-editor and so on).

> Oh, and please don't just point them to plone-site... do that in the
> long description, and point them to that and to "how to get Zope
> actually running" in plone's README.Debian.  So, they can choose
> themselves: do the manual Zope setup, or do the easy-peasy apt-get
> install plone-site.  ;)

What about a patch? My english is far from being perfect, maybe you
could help me finding the good sentences for writing down your idea.

> You mention dzhandle in the long description of at least
> zope2.8-sandbox, so why not mention it in the main zope2.8 long desc
> too?

I think that long description is not the right place for this kind of
documentation, but README.Debian of zope-common is a good place and it
already contains these things.

I'll add a symbolic link from /usr/share/doc/zopeX/README.Debian
to /usr/share/doc/zope-common/README.Debian.

> (Oh, and add a zsh completion script for dzhandle (and one for bash for
> good measure), and I'd actually like dzhandle :P )

The bash one will be shipped with the next upload, for the zsh I'm
waiting for your patch. :)

> When I do that search, I get 33 lines.  The plone lines are 4 and 5
> (or 5 and 6, two different systems).  In other words, hidden in a sea
> of other stuff.  I give you that aptitude does better here...

Sorry, but I can't change the order of those lines.

> But since neither plone nor zope says what a "zope instance" means (I
> found the "assuming too much" spot! ;) ).  For a Zope veteran, this is
> obvious.  But don't we want to get non-Zopistas on board? Especially
> given the ease of use of Plone (compared to Zope's <elided> ;) )?
> 
> I'm not saying Zope *must* create a default instance (Not anymore, I
> deleted that paragraph which was right here ;) ).  What I mean to say
> is that things need to be more obvious, more "in the user's face" if
> you will.

zope-common's README.Debian already says this, I'll symlink it to the
zope(2.[89]|3) doc dir.

> PPS: You actually made it down here?  Congratulations, you are very
> perseverant! :)

You too. :)

-- 
Fabio Tranchitella                         http://www.kobold.it
Free Software Developer and Consultant     http://www.tranchitella.it
_____________________________________________________________________
1024D/7F961564, fpr 5465 6E69 E559 6466 BF3D 9F01 2BF8 EE2B 7F96 1564
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Questa parte del messaggio =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E8?= firmata
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-zope-developers/attachments/20060405/d67d271b/attachment.pgp