[MacPorts] #20773: Add zope2.10
dweber at macports.org
Tue Sep 8 13:29:26 PDT 2009
I'm curious about zope/plone, so not the best option to be a maintainer. I
can, however, take a shot at the update, although it's not looking like a
trivial process to get up to speed on this one!
Check out this list of ports in the dports/zope tree:
The download link looks simple enough:
Zope appears to be stable at 2.11.4 and 3.4.0, so the dilemma may be which
one or how many to port?
>From the zope site, we have options to download/install various python CMF
The recent stable versions of the python CMF available are 2.1.1, which is
not the same as the python-zopeinterface version (3.3.0).
The plot thickens when we get to the level of a Plone dependency tree, i.e.:
>From this FAQ, it appears the plone installation may require it's own
For my part, I want to focus on Plone. I may work out a way to install
plone with the bundled dependencies to avoid conflicts with other ports OR
try to massage a Plone port to work with other ports. Note the specific
dependency for Plone 3.x on python2.4.4 - it just doesn't get more specific
than that ;-) As a general note about MacPorts, the general philosophy to
maintain the most up to date packages is good. It's best to avoid multiple
installation versions, wherever possible. In this case (Plone 3.x), it
appears the very specific dependency requirements may force us to adopt some
very version specific ports to satisfy those dependencies (eg, a port for
python2.4.4 and zope2.10.x.
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org>wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2009, at 14:53, Darren Weber wrote:
> I'm curious about using Plone, which is currently at version 3.3. I've
>> downloaded the "unified installer" from http://plone.org/products/plone and
>> I'll take a look at the content of that package to see what the latest
>> dependencies are (most likely they are satisfied by some MacPorts).
>> However, it appears the zope port is outdated.
>> Is anyone else working on the Zope port? Is it a significant dependency
>> of many other ports that are in wide use now? That is, what reason is there
>> for the zope port to be "outdated", if any? Are there functional reasons,
>> politics, superceded software, or what?
> As far as I know, the zope ports (there are 43 ports with "zope" in the
> name) are outdated because nobody maintains them. (Only the three
> py*-zopeinterface ports are maintained.) It would be great if somebody would
> maintain the rest of them and update them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the macports-dev