Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
How about starting with Zope 3 Toolkit and then moving to Zope Toolkit
after a year or so.
I'll repeat it again: the Zope Toolkit is not intended to fulfill the
same role as Zope 3. You imply something like that here. I know that the
Zope Toolkit isn't the same as
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
-1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), Zope 3 *is* a
dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
believe in. I think the consequences of the brand confusion are hard
for those uf us
Andreas Jung wrote:
In addition, some of the Acquistion test fail when trying to test the
package alone:
[...]
Can anyone reproduce this?
no, i don't see any failures with neither 2.11.1 nor 2.12.1 on a debian
box (32-bit, though).
andi
--
zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ -
Hey Jonathan,
Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
I was going to try to further explain my compromise which tried to
move in the direction you are attempting, but upon reflection decided
that you are completely right and that no-one else gets it (we are
all as dumb as stones), so instead...
Am Montag, 20. April 2009 09:35 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
Stephan Richter wrote:
...
I never communicated to anyone that I believe that Zope 3 is
a successor of Zope 2. Other people pushed that message.
That message has been out there from the start, no matter how
it arose. One way this
Am 07.04.2009 um 20:39 schrieb Michael Howitz:
Hi,
zope.app.exception depends on zope.formlib to use the NamedTemplate
for the Unauthorized view.
As zope.formlib has many dependencies I propose to depend on
z3c.template to get a named template.
(Even z3c.layer.pagelet depends on
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Sun Apr 19 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Mon Apr 20 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests.
Test failures
-
Subject: FAILED (failures=8) : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Sun Apr 19
Hi,
I usually love gmail, but in these last discussions I have trouble to
understand, where I should write my reply to, since I can not see a
thread. So I write a reply to the first mail and reference to various
mails below. Sorry for that confusion to the people who use real mail
readers!
I
Helmut Merz wrote:
[snip story]
So that's my story.
@Martijn: do you still have access to the PSU time machine? It
would be great if you could verify this somehow. Or maybe you
can even get clearer and more consistent information...
:)
We need to learn more about this Zivilisation! I
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
-1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), Zope 3 *is* a
dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
believe in. I think the consequences of the brand confusion are hard
for those uf us
Hey Patrick,
Patrick Gerken wrote:
[snip]
I did not check wikipedia, nor did I skim the last three years of
mailing list traffic, I wonder, did I not do enough thoroughly
research in 2008?
I think the strong impression was given that Zope 3 was going to be the
new bright future and that Zope
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 08:32:52AM -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Given that definition, Zope Toolkit will start relatively small, since
much of Zope 3 does not yet qualify. However, as people refine
packages, the packages will be reconsidered for inclusion in the Zope
Toolkit, and the Zope
Albertas Agejevas wrote:
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 08:32:52AM -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Given that definition, Zope Toolkit will start relatively small, since
much of Zope 3 does not yet qualify. However, as people refine
packages, the packages will be reconsidered for inclusion in the Zope
Shane Hathaway wrote:
1. Candidate must be have Zope 3 experience.
2. Candidate must be experienced with the Zope Toolkit.
Of course I meant...
1. Candidate must have Zope 3 experience.
2. Candidate must have Zope Toolkit experience.
Shane
___
Am Montag, 20. April 2009 16:11 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
Helmut Merz wrote:
[snip story]
So that's my story.
@Martijn: do you still have access to the PSU time machine?
It would be great if you could verify this somehow. Or maybe
you can even get clearer and more consistent
Do we still care about Python 2.4 + Zope 2.12? Do we go Python 2.6 only?
Thanks,
Stefan
On 20.04.2009, at 14:00, Zope Tests Summarizer wrote:
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Sun Apr 19 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Mon Apr 20 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope
Stefan H. Holek wrote:
Do we still care about Python 2.4 + Zope 2.12? Do we go Python 2.6 only?
We still care about Python 2.4, I made a premature checkin of a new
zope.session version that is BBB incompatible. Bad me only tested under
Python 2.6 before checking in.
Hanno
On 20.04.2009, at
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 18:42, Shane Hathaway sh...@hathawaymix.org wrote:
It occurred to me that one simple test of a Zope naming scheme is to
consider what employers will write in job descriptions.
That's a bloody good point.
--
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 18:42, Shane Hathaway sh...@hathawaymix.org wrote:
It occurred to me that one simple test of a Zope naming scheme is to
consider what employers will write in job descriptions.
That's a bloody good point.
Thanks. I take it this point reinforces
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 23:32, Shane Hathaway sh...@hathawaymix.org wrote:
Also, it follows the open source tradition of slightly whimsical names. The
logo could be a train engine driven by a Zope fish. :-)
Done. Does this mailing list accept attachements?
Wowsers.
On 4/20/09 3:35 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
-1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), Zope 3 *is* a
dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
believe in. I think the consequences of
21 matches
Mail list logo
