Re: [Zope-CMF] SVN: Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt - made sure we don't call views inadvertently
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Yvo Schubbe wrote: Log message for revision 113583: - made sure we don't call views inadvertently Changed: U Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt -=- Modified: Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt === --- Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt 2010-06-17 07:45:21 UTC (rev 113582) +++ Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt 2010-06-17 07:50:44 UTC (rev 113583) @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ metal:slot metal:fill-slot=body i18n:domain=cmf_calendar div metal:define-macro=calendarBox class=CalendarBox - tal:define=calendar_box_view context/@@calendar_box_view; + tal:define=calendar_box_view nocall:context/@@calendar_box_view; yearmonth calendar_box_view/getMonthAndYear; year python:yearmonth[0]; month python:yearmonth[1]; How was this template working at all before? If it was, do we have a backwards-compatibility issue on these nocall; changes -- that is, will this change break compatibility with a still-supported older version of Zope? Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkwaD0oACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ71JwCgnU8sPtUH1trhZ7u+NBJe1TVa GnEAn1Xj00rLSVpnix6UpdLcATDPyUKu =eNgX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] SVN: Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt - made sure we don't call views inadvertently
Tres Seaver wrote: Modified: Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt === --- Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt 2010-06-17 07:45:21 UTC (rev 113582) +++ Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt 2010-06-17 07:50:44 UTC (rev 113583) @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ metal:slot metal:fill-slot=body i18n:domain=cmf_calendar div metal:define-macro=calendarBox class=CalendarBox - tal:define=calendar_box_view context/@@calendar_box_view; + tal:define=calendar_box_view nocall:context/@@calendar_box_view; yearmonth calendar_box_view/getMonthAndYear; year python:yearmonth[0]; month python:yearmonth[1]; How was this template working at all before? If it was, do we have a backwards-compatibility issue on these nocall; changes -- that is, will this change break compatibility with a still-supported older version of Zope? This is related to upgrading zope.formlib and zope.app.form to 4.x. A new base class seems to have a __call__ method that did not exist before. But I didn't try to figure out what exactly changed because nocall: is anyway what we always wanted. As long as the view can't be called it doesn't make a difference, so I don't think we have a BBB issue. Cheers, Yuppie ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] SVN: Products.CMFCalendar/trunk/Products/CMFCalendar/browser/templates/calendar_widgets.pt - made sure we don't call views inadvertently
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: How was this template working at all before? If it was, do we have a backwards-compatibility issue on these nocall; changes -- that is, will this change break compatibility with a still-supported older version of Zope? This is related to upgrading zope.formlib and zope.app.form to 4.x. A new base class seems to have a __call__ method that did not exist before. But I didn't try to figure out what exactly changed because nocall: is anyway what we always wanted. As long as the view can't be called it doesn't make a difference, so I don't think we have a BBB issue. Ah, ok -- thanks for the explanation. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkwaFYQACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ6CJQCcCzUeJjJOM6opAh04P2ZAkoRN A2EAniY+o8nhjOth709TxHhXirnG0eBh =yW70 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
