On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net wrote:
On 11/11/10 13:48 , Chris Rossi wrote:
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:40 AM, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net
mailto:wich...@wiggy.net wrote:
On 11/11/10 12:38 , Wichert Akkerman wrote:
On 11/11/10 12:05
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:38 PM, reed reedobr...@gmail.com wrote:
I am not adverse to renaming, but I think it needs to be definitive
and concise enough to prevent more questions from arising than it
would solve. I don't think 'resource' meets those criteria.
I tend to agree with this.
Sold. +1
Chris
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Mark Ramm mark.mchristen...@gmail.comwrote:
So, I will confess to being the one who asked for this change, and
while I'm definitely open to other options, I think resource is a good
term for items in the graph. The graph itself I'm not sure
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Jonathan Vanasco jonat...@findmeon.comwrote:
looking at the source, I see:
* pyramid/chamelon_text.py
* pyramid/chamelon_zpt.py
* pyramid/mako_templating.py
was there any reason for these being on the top-level, and not under a
consolidated namespace like
It's dead in that no one is currently using or maintaining it. It was a
fun hack, but I never really found much use for it myself. I don't
remember super well, but I think it starts to show its rough edges with
complex schemas with many nested layers, but is really slick for simple,
shallow
I had not seen schematics before. The information on the pypi page does
look promising. And active is good. The only reason you might consider
limone at this point, I would think, is if you want to continue using your
Colander schemas instead of writing new schematics models. Conversion is
I use nginx+waitress in production. Except once in a blue moon I've used
gunicorn for something with long persistent connections. (Streaming music
server, anything that uses socket.io, etc...)
Chris
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Bastian Kuberek wrote:
> Like others, I