Talk:Zope

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

does anyone not think it doesn't stick to a neutral pov?

These links were removed by User:DavidWBrooks as advertising

I dont't think all of them are. --Leopard 09:30, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

External links[edit]

  • Value Added Zope Resellers / Services Providers

Zope User Groups[edit]

I think most of these links are not needed. The zope.org is the one necessary link. The rest can be easily found from there or on Google. And, indeed, if we let some of them back it will be hard to argue what's OK and what's not. Alga 22:20, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

Apparently some of them helped me. But I found them in a Google chache if i recall it right and unfortunately not in Wikipedia. External links are for knowledge beyond the explanation in Wikipedia as far as I understood it. That helped me for understanding PHP or CMS in the past and it was helpful. Cutting Links down without reason is not. But you can may convince me. --Leopard 14:20, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have anything specific in mind? Alga 17:10, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
Yes particulary Free Zope Hosting Services was helpful. --Leopard 11:10, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Links I find to be advertising or not needed[edit]

There are currently still a few links that definetly are advertising:

This is a commercial company of little note; a recruitment agency specializing in certain nice markets.

Certainly not appropriate in the context of only 3 or 4 external links.

There are many local Zope comunities; listing them all would be too many, listing one or a few is misplaced.

There is something to be said for linking to Zope.com, if only from the history section (Zope Corporation), as it has bearing on the history of Zope.

I'll go ahead and remove the two links in a day or so unless someone objects. --MJ 13:53, 26 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Zope 3[edit]

I believe the section on Zope 3 needs to be re-worked to fit better into the flow of the article as a whole. As it stands now, Zope has two paths: Zope 2 and Zope 3; where most of the Zope 2 work is in the form of back-porting Zope 3 features so that there is a migration path for Zope 2 products to reach Zope 3. 164.58.79.195 20:35, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Squib[edit]

The page Squib (program) redirects to Zope but the Zope page has no reference to this word. What is the relationship (e.g., is Squib an old name for Zope or something)? An explanation should be included in the Zope article or Squib should have its own short article, presumably with a link to Zope. EdDavies 12:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I searched the Web with Google and I couldn't find any major reference to a program called "Squib". I'd say "Squib (program)" should be removed entirely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.191.172.70 (talk) 14:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Question about Zope examples for Web template[edit]

We (working on Template language features) need some examples for particular Zope features, but need to check.

  1. There are a "re-use" schema on TAL? Example, on <a href="http://www.zope.org" tal:attributes="python: 'href http://www.wikipedia.org'">CLICK HERE</a>, the Zope home page will be a default?
  2. anothers questions later ...

-- Krauss 29 November 2006

I don't understand the question. --Regebro 22:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, confused question and terms, with not very good example (need URL as a variable). It is about default behavior: if tal:attributes have a empty, null or false value, what a href shows? the http://www.zope.org link? -- Krauss 3 December 2006

OK, I can't be nothered to actually verify this code, but here goes from memory:
An empty value, null or False, will still replace the default (as well it should, how would you otherwise be able to insert these values ;-) ), but there is a value called default to get that behaviour: <a href="frotz" tal:attributes="href foo |default"> will use the value of foo, unless that evaluates to false, in which case "frotz" will be the value. I've never ever actually used that, though. It's to implicit and complicated. The code <a tal:attributes="href python:foo or "frotz""> does the same, is shorter and clearer and less magic. --Regebro 22:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

someone should mention Grok[edit]

As one of its creators, it wouldn't be appropriate for me to do so, but it's a notable enough part of Zope by now. Martijn Faassen (talk) 03:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't look like anyone's interested? Martijn Faassen (talk) 17:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't THE killer app of Python[edit]

It is a wild exaggeration to say that Zope is or was "Python's killer app", as if Python only had one. If Zope was THE killer app of Python, what were Red Hat and Google, just ordinary apps? Even the citation given only says a killer app, not the killer app. I'm changing what it says. Greg Kuperberg (talk) 01:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Red Hat and Google aren't even apps. Zope was the application that got Python noticed and used, and proved it could be used in massive applications. Red Hat is a distribution, how you get that to be a killer app is incomprehensible. Google is a company. Their widespread use of Python has indeed lent a lot of credibility to Python, especially after Guido van Rossum moved there, which he did after Zope corporation. --OpenFuture (talk) 06:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Red Hat wrote a lot of Python system tools for their distributions that did much more than Zope did to get Python noticed and used. In fact the whole point of Python is not to have "massive" applications, it's to have good applications. If you want to quibble with what is or is not a killer app, still, saying that Zope is the thing that put Python in "the spotlight" (whatever that means) is just wrong. It's incredibly arrogant given that Python has been used for a lot of things that are more important than Zope. Greg Kuperberg (talk) 14:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody said it was "the point". But it showed that you *could*, and that Python was not just a script language, but a serious programming language. Hence: Killer app. I don't see how it can be arrogant to claim Zope is Pythons killer app unless you are the one who wrote it. The fact is that it's a common view point, and it's sourced in the article to Mark Lutz, who is not one of Zope's primary authors. So how you get it to be arrogant is beyond me. It's clear that you have some sort of emotional investment here. I suggest that you drop it. --OpenFuture (talk) 16:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article should at the very least stick to what the reference says. The reference says, "many Pythonistas have looked to it as a Python Killer Application". It says, "a killer application". It does not say "Python's killer app". It says, "many have looked to it as". It does not say, "has been recognized as". I'm sure that it is a common viewpoint, in a certain circles, but there are equally many people who don't especially think of Zope as a "killer app", much less "Python's killer app". Greg Kuperberg (talk) 19:14, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also the phrases "THE application" that helped put Python in "THE spotlight" are just wrong, despite what Mark Lutz says. There have always been more than one application and more than one spotlight for Python. Greg Kuperberg (talk) 19:17, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And apparently, you are unable to make that simple change yourself, but you do know who to add a POV-tag. Yeah, that makes sense. Or not. --OpenFuture (talk) 04:31, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, I did make that simple change myself, and you erased it twice. I said, "Zope has been promoted as a killer app of Python," and I kept your citation. So this time I will make the simple change I made before, AND add the POV tag, and you can decide which one to remove. Greg Kuperberg (talk) 16:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That statement is incorrect and not what the source says. What you are doing now is vandalism, and if you continue you will be blocked. I suggest you take a deep breath, and cool down. --OpenFuture (talk) 17:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that you should accuse me of vandalism, and I also don't see what's incorrect about what I wrote. But your current version is at least improved and I'm happy to compromise and let it rest. Greg Kuperberg (talk) 17:31, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't understand that changing a sourced statement so that it contradicts what the source says, and change the statement into something that is simply untrue is incorrect, then I probably can't help you much, and then you probably should leave Wikipedia alone. --OpenFuture (talk) 18:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really "free" software?[edit]

The article even states that the Zope license is more akin to an implementation of the BSD_license than anything else. There is a clear distinction between "free" software and "open source" software -- one does not imply the other. See Open_source_vs._free_software.

I believe we should remove the term "free" from the intro text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacez320 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's both open source and free (as in beer *and* speech), as is the BSD license. --OpenFuture (talk) 14:58, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Zope. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Zope&oldid=1210042461"