[Zope-CMF] CMF Collector: Open Issues
The following supporters have open issues assigned to them in this collector (http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF). Assigned and Open mhammond - Windows DevelopmentMode penalty in CMFCore.DirectoryView, [Accepted] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/366 Pending / Deferred Issues - FSPropertiesObject.py cannot handle multiline input for lines, text attributes, [Deferred] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/271 - Can't invalidate skin items in a RAMCacheManager, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/343 - workflow notify success should be after reindex, [Deferred] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/389 - Possible bug when using a BTreeFolder Member folder, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/441 - Proxy Roles not Working/Applied to Worflow Transition Scripts, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/449 - safe_html filters some tags which should probably not be filtered, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/452 - purge_old in runAllImportSteps not working, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/455 - Danger from Caching Policy Manager, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/460 - properties setup handler: support for non-ascii strings, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/468 - GenericSetup does not handle non-ascii data well, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/471 Pending / Deferred Features - Favorite.py: queries and anchors in remote_url, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/26 - DefaultDublinCore should have Creator property, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/61 - Document.py: universal newlines, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/174 - portal_type is undefined in initialization code, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/248 - CMFTopic Does Not Cache, [Deferred] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/295 - Wishlist: a flag that tags the selected action., [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/301 - CMFDefault should make use of allowCreate(), [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/340 - Nested Skins, [Deferred] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/377 - CatalogVariableProvider code + tests, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/378 - manage_doCustomize() : minor additions, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/382 - CMF needs View-based TypeInformation, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/437 - Marker attributes should be deprecated, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/440 - New getNextEvent Method, [Pending] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/462 ___ 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] Re: [dev] GenericSetup and five.localsitemanager: managing tool registrations
Hi Hanno! Hanno Schlichting wrote: yuppie wrote: Issue 3: Problem: The export handler uses registeredUtilities(). Tools looked up that way are not acquisition wrapped, object paths can't be found. Solution: Use getUtility() for each registered utility. The real issue here is that five.localsitemanager does not return wrapped utilities in all cases. This has been become apparent when you have a nested site manager which is not based on five.lsm. You get unwrapped utilities then in all cases. Onces this is fixed in five.lsm the export handler should work. +1, at least in the long run. If we don't have soon an improved version of five.localsitemanager, I still think using getUtility() makes sense as a temporary workaround. Issue 4: Problem: The re-wrapped tools returned by five.localsitemanager are always wrapped in the site root. We don't know the actual path of the tool. Solution: Support only tools in the root of the local site (or sub-site), no tools in normal subdirectories. OK, this means adding a bit of documentation and removing the half-baked support for registering tools in subfolders, right? +1 Issue 5: Problem: If modified as proposed, the handler still has problems exporting the ISiteRoot utility. The exported object path is empty, but import expects '/'. Solution: Support '' as well for import, deprecating '/'. Sounds fine. Should we deprecate the whole '/' in all cases then, as we only support registering objects in the same directory anyways? +1 I cannot promise to look at those things shortly, but should find some time once we have the Plone 3 beta out, which means probably in two weeks or so. Of course any help is most appreciated :) Great! 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
[Zope-CMF] [GenericSetup] site profiles vs. extension profiles
While working with a customer with GenericSetup the following question came up: Within the Setup tools properties screen you can choose the active site configuration. The select box shows both site profiles and extension profile. In our understanding a site profile replaces an existing configuration when running the import for all steps in comparison to an incremental operation on the existing configuration when choosing an extension profile. However you can't distinguish the different profile types within the select element..this might be confusing because the behavior is different in both cases. Is this intentional? Andreas pgpb2pvIJeUAd.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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] CMF Tests: 9 OK, 2 Unknown
Summary of messages to the cmf-tests list. Period Thu Mar 15 12:00:00 2007 UTC to Fri Mar 16 12:00:00 2007 UTC. There were 11 messages: 11 from CMF Unit Tests. Unknown --- Subject: UNKNOWN : CMF-2.1 Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:37:06 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004352.html Subject: UNKNOWN : CMF-trunk Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:40:06 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004354.html Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : CMF-1.5 Zope-2.7 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:25:06 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004344.html Subject: OK : CMF-1.5 Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:26:36 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004345.html Subject: OK : CMF-1.5 Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:28:06 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004346.html Subject: OK : CMF-1.6 Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:29:36 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004347.html Subject: OK : CMF-1.6 Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:31:06 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004348.html Subject: OK : CMF-2.0 Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:32:36 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004349.html Subject: OK : CMF-2.0 Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:34:06 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004350.html Subject: OK : CMF-2.1 Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:35:36 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004351.html Subject: OK : CMF-trunk Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Thu Mar 15 22:38:36 EDT 2007 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2007-March/004353.html ___ 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] Re: opaque items
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Miles wrote: Hi, I'm looking at the callable opaque items and trying to understand when they might be used. Apologies in advance for the vagueness of this question. Has anyone got any ideas about what sort of situations it would be useful to use an ICallableOpaqueItem in - I'm having some trouble understanding what sort of general problem they solve / what the advantage is . . . and when you wouldn't use it! I would consider it a wart, at this point: it was intended to support auto-recursive cut-copy-paste, without exposing the opeaque things as ObjectManager items. I think all of that could be better served by having the event handlers (the replacements for 'manage_afterAdd', 'manage_beforeDelete', 'manage_afterClone') adapt the context object to get the list of persistent subobjects. Classes which have such subobjects which are not items would need adapters. Also, does anyone know of any examples of its use other than CMFUid and the CMF Discussion tool? I think it might help if there was a bit more for me to look at . . . Thanks for any opinions I strongly doubt anything else uses it. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF+q+k+gerLs4ltQ4RAsoqAKCRtHjy1G61/y+aulvZI8LIv9QnGACePtJu aUDXfT4SLDdeDwvc2XjyQu8= =s+Tm -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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] Re: [GenericSetup] site profiles vs. extension profiles
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andreas Jung wrote: While working with a customer with GenericSetup the following question came up: Within the Setup tools properties screen you can choose the active site configuration. The select box shows both site profiles and extension profile. In our understanding a site profile replaces an existing configuration when running the import for all steps in comparison to an incremental operation on the existing configuration when choosing an extension profile. However you can't distinguish the different profile types within the select element..this might be confusing because the behavior is different in both cases. Is this intentional? OK, the new UI for the Profiles tab (formerly Properties) is now available on a branch. Please check it out, and let us know what you think: http://svn.zope.org/GenericSetup/branches/tseaver-bbq_sprint Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF+wMi+gerLs4ltQ4RAtp9AKCZ2m5i53zZ4p/hmdjfhyykSBdXzgCfU80P 7Hsrg8IvTb1ewlD/e4lqIYk= =LjrU -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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
