Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-CMF] Fighting the Zope 2.9 testrunner
Stephan Richter wrote: On Tuesday 21 March 2006 02:54, Chris Withers wrote: I particularly hate the fact that no real effort was put into backwards compatibility, not to mention those silly weird sort-of-fifty-dots-per-line thing that doesn't actually work. I think this is not fair. Jim has tried very, very hard to convert all the functionality in a backward-compatible way. ...except one of the most commonly used parameters ;-) cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-CMF] Fighting the Zope 2.9 testrunner
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: I'm not sure what Chris meant, but the change to the visual output of the testrunner when running with dots seems gratuitous to me, as well -- I don't see any benefit to the indented, narrower output, Me neither, for what it's worth. Okay, Tres, can you give me a line number I can poke at to remove this? It seems like Jim doesn't care too much, and I see 3 people at least who don't like it. Zope 2.9 broke the 'confiugre-make' dance in several ways, due (I think) to the choice to bolt on^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hretrofit zpkg. Sort of. It didn't break configure make. It's just make install that was broken. I think Tres was assuming that was an integral part of it ;-) I still don't understand why people whine about make install being gone. The point of a checkout is that you have a full functional SVN working copy, not an installation source. If you want to install things, use a TGZ archive which lets you do make install perfectly fine. I've never installed Zope anywhere except on production servers anyway, and there you should obviously use releases. Tres and Jens have already made the comments I was going to, but just to note that I strongly agree with them... cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
[Zope-CMF] [dev] five_template slots
Hi! A while ago the five_template for the trunk / CMF 2.0 was replaced by the one from CMFonFive. I still have some difficulties understanding the rationale behind that change. I never got an answer to this mail: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-cmf/2006-January/023746.html AFAICS there are two use cases for the five_template: 1.) Provide generic slots used in Five and Zope 3 The five_template shipped with Five provides two slots: 'style_slot' and 'body'. The old CMF five_template did provide the same two slots. The new five_template maps 'style_slot' to a non-existent 'css_slot'. 2.) Provide cmf specific slots in @@standard_macros/page The new five_template provides 'base' and 'header', mapping them to the corresponding slots in main_template. 'body' is mapped to 'main', so all slots in main_template can be filled via the five_template. I'm not sure if we really should support that use case. At least it is less important than the first use case. Issues: --- - mapping 'style_slot' to 'css_slot' is an obvious bug, that change should be reverted - the 'header' slot behaves different than in main_template: main_template provides default content for 'header', the five_template 'header' is empty by default. I'd like to keep that in sync, but maybe we should remove the default content from main_template. Most skin templates override the 'header' slot anyway. - the Five 'body' slot doesn't map very well to the CMF 'main' slot: 'header' *and* 'main' would match better. Proposal: - 1.) Add a new 'body' slot in main_template that wraps around the 'header' and the 'main' slot. You can either use 'body' *or* 'header' and 'main'. 2.) Remove the default content in main_template's 'header' slot. 3.) Replace five_template by something like this: metal:macro metal:define-macro=page html metal:use-macro=context/main_template/macros/master head metal:slot metal:fill-slot=base metal:slot metal:define-slot=base / /metal:slot metal:slot metal:fill-slot=style_slot metal:slot metal:define-slot=style_slot / /metal:slot /head body metal:slot metal:fill-slot=body metal:slot metal:define-slot=body metal:slot metal:define-slot=header / metal:slot metal:define-slot=main / /metal:slot /metal:slot /body /html /metal:macro 4.) Change the browser view templates to use 'main' instead of 'body' (that no longer maps to 'main'). Any feedback is welcome. If there are no objections I'd like to make the proposed changes on Saturday, before the 2.0-beta2 release. Cheers, Yuppie ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
