[Zope-CMF] CMF Tests: 11 OK
Summary of messages to the cmf-tests list. Period Tue Jan 15 12:00:00 2008 UTC to Wed Jan 16 12:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 11 messages: 11 from CMF Unit Tests. Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : CMF-1.5 Zope-2.7 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:15:44 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007652.html Subject: OK : CMF-1.5 Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:17:14 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007653.html Subject: OK : CMF-1.5 Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:18:44 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007654.html Subject: OK : CMF-1.6 Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:20:14 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007655.html Subject: OK : CMF-1.6 Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:21:44 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007656.html Subject: OK : CMF-2.0 Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:23:15 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007657.html Subject: OK : CMF-2.0 Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:24:45 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007658.html Subject: OK : CMF-2.1 Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:26:15 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007659.html Subject: OK : CMF-2.1 Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:27:45 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007660.html Subject: OK : CMF-trunk Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:29:15 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007661.html Subject: OK : CMF-trunk Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Tue Jan 15 22:30:45 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/cmf-tests/2008-January/007662.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: Adapterizing CMFCore.WorkflowTool
yuppie wrote: Hi Laurence! Laurence Rowe wrote: yuppie wrote: Now I see why you didn't propose named adapters. But I'm still not happy with adapting (IContentish, basestring). Did you consider to add getId() to IWorkflowDefinition and to adapt (IContentish, IWorkflowDefinition)? Then I don't see how you would register adapter for a specific (TTW or generic setup defined) workflow. Perhaps a named adapter lookup falling back to a plain adapter lookup is the best solution? All the solutions you propose to solve this look a bit like a hack to me - I guess because you want to use adapters for something they are not designed for. AFAICT the default pattern for adapting specific objects is to use marker interfaces. Why do we need a different solution for workflows? Because they have names already. At the moment an integrator can easily set up workflows through the web and export a generic setup profile. I'd like to preserve this way of working. I'd like to enable the possibility of registering different adapters for different workflows, but as far as I know there is no easy way of importing/exporting marker interfaces attached to TTW workflows. However the solution is a bit ugly, so I guess the best way forward is making the modifications you suggest. A developer can then register an adapter that performs named adapter lookups if s/he so wishes. I'll create a branch and make the changes. Laurence ___ 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
