[Web-SIG] Can't we all just get along? (was: Re: wsgiconfig design)

Jim Fulton jim at zope.com
Sun Jul 8 14:31:16 CEST 2007

On Jul 8, 2007, at 7:48 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:

> On 7/8/07, Jim Fulton <jim at zope.com> wrote:
> I don't understand why your talks are assumed to be uninteresting to
> non-Zope-users (how much evidence do you have?

A fair bit. I've had people tell me, "Oh, I'm not going to that, it's  
a Zope talk."  Also, based on who's in the audience.  This isn't  
always the case, but it is too often IMO.

> ), but I have a feeling
> that the "branding" of generally useful functionality with a
> particular framework's name is just bad politics. I agree that it's
> unhealthy for that functionality to be ignored, but the solution is
> not to complain about people's behavior (that's rarely going to change
> the behavior being deplored) but to become sensitive to the problem
> that the brand *apparently* causes and switch to a different brand.

Your point is well taken wrt the zope name.  I find this phenomena   
applies to "zc" as well. I use the zc namespace so that my package  
names can be descriptive without creating annoying name conflicts. Is  
"zc" a brand?  It seems reasonable that namespace package names  
should reflect organization names.  If that makes them too brand- 
laden, then how should people pick namespace names?  Should we pick  
random letters? Should I use namespaces like "python", "web", or  
maybe "nice"? ;)

Aside from the more general issue, in the context of web software, I  
hope we can reuse each others components without having to rename  
everything.  What a waste of time that would be.  Does this have to  
be so political?


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

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list