Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 3, OK: 43
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > [1]FAILED winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32 > https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052734.html > > > [2]FAILED winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64 > https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052735.html These two look like transient network failures during boostrapping. > [3]FAILED winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64 > https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052766.html This one too, only the boostrap failure was silent, so it blew up in the buildout step. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk7EjUYACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ6f9gCg26uw9CfudCFOzmtO6w0fqVEb 9KsAoLwFL9UCvoOeE5nWTHG5oOCGvA0d =j2Vw -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] security.public/private/protected decorators
Sorry, forgot to Cc a couple of people involved in discussion and
solution included in this mail.
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:33:56 -0800, Florian Friesdorf wrote:
>
> Hi Matthew, Alan,
>
> as discussed during ploneconf2011 I wrote the decorators:
> security.public
> security.private
> security.protected
> as successors to their declareX pendants.
>
> All new code is fully covered (except a raise).
>
> @all: please review AccessControl r123394 - r123399
>
> security.protected('permission') returns a decorator and it should be
> ensured that all those decorators are actually called, i.e. that the @
> isn't missing.
>
> flo
--
Florian Friesdorf
GPG FPR: 7A13 5EEE 1421 9FC2 108D BAAF 38F8 99A3 0C45 F083
Jabber/XMPP: f...@chaoflow.net
IRC: chaoflow on freenode,ircnet,blafasel,OFTC
pgpdXIYoRPGZW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] security.public/private/protected decorators
Hi Matthew, Alan,
as discussed during ploneconf2011 I wrote the decorators:
security.public
security.private
security.protected
as successors to their declareX pendants.
All new code is fully covered (except a raise).
@all: please review AccessControl r123394 - r123399
security.protected('permission') returns a decorator and it should be
ensured that all those decorators are actually called, i.e. that the @
isn't missing.
flo
--
Florian Friesdorf
GPG FPR: 7A13 5EEE 1421 9FC2 108D BAAF 38F8 99A3 0C45 F083
Jabber/XMPP: f...@chaoflow.net
IRC: chaoflow on freenode,ircnet,blafasel,OFTC
pgpL1PCNZa8O3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 3, OK: 43
This is the summary for test reports received on the zope-tests list between 2011-11-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2011-11-16 00:00:00 UTC: See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds. An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our buildbot documentation: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html#the-nightly-builds Reports received Bluebream / Python2.5.5 64bit linux Bluebream / Python2.6.7 64bit linux Bluebream / Python2.7.2 64bit linux ZTK 1.0 / Python2.4.6 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.0 / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.0 / Python2.6.7 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.4.6 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.6.7 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.1 / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.1 / Python2.6.7 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.1 / Python2.7.2 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.1dev / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.1dev / Python2.6.7 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.1dev / Python2.7.2 Linux 64bit Zope 3.4 KGS / Python2.4.6 64bit linux Zope 3.4 KGS / Python2.5.5 64bit linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-32bit-linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-32bit-linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-64bit-linux Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-2.13 Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-2.13-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-trunk Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux winbot / ZODB_dev py_254_win32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win64 [1]winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32 [2]winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64 winbot / ztk_10 py_254_win32 winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win32 winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_11 py_254_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win64 winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win32 [3]winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win32 winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win64 Non-OK results -- [1]FAILED winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052734.html [2]FAILED winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052735.html [3]FAILED winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052766.html ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Zope 4 ZMI sprint report
Hi, as you might have noticed there was a sprint and we'd like to update you on what happened. :) Sorry if we under-communicated beforehand. As part of the DZUG[1] sprint series[2] we tried looking into what a refreshed ZMI for Zope 4 could be. We started working on some code (it's really not that much) and gathered our thoughts[3] about the ZMI that might be interesting for you to read. We hope to follow up on this in the near future. However, we also discussed technical and organisational hurdles that we met and that kept us from "just doing" the ZMI and we're currently approaching the Zope Foundation board about "officially" establishing the Zope 4 project and concentrating our efforts on that. We think there will be a need (and we have some ideas for that) to establish project management, a mission statement and road map so that we can all channel our efforts together. Cheers, Christian Theune (and Charlie Clark, Veit Schiele, Yvo Schubbe, Jens Vagelpohl) [1] In case you haven't heard, we're in the process of renaming this to "Python Software Verband" - Germany's Python Software Foundation. So PySV will be showing up instead of DZUG in the future. [2] We're working on a sprint series concept that will establish sprint opportunities for Python-related projects in Germany on a quarterly basis. I personally hope to use those to work on stuff like Zope 4 in a more productive manner than with those sprint days attached to an already exhausting conference. [3] http://docs.zope.org/zmi.core/thoughts.html -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On 11/16/2011 11:30 AM, Christian Theune wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4. > > As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more > details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature. > > From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices > upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple > orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to > leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework. > > I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone. I'm interpreting the thread overall as an OK to revive the ++skin++ traverser. Thanks, Christian -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On 11/16/2011 04:12 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote: > On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebro wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark >> wrote: >>> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro: >>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both confuses the heck out of me. >>> >>> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think >>> we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers, >>> well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins >>> still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out >>> of the box. >> >> When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die. > > While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of > competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be > careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of > CMF skin scripts and templates in Plone that I don't want to become a > blocker for adopting Zope 4. This should be the first of several > releases that progressively rationalise our software stack, lets not > try and do it all at once. Ack. -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebro wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark > wrote: >> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro : >> >>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both >>> confuses the heck out of me. >> >> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think >> we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers, >> well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins >> still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out >> of the box. > > When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die. While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of CMF skin scripts and templates in Plone that I don't want to become a blocker for adopting Zope 4. This should be the first of several releases that progressively rationalise our software stack, lets not try and do it all at once. Laurence ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
Am 16.11.2011, 15:15 Uhr, schrieb Christian Theune : > But they also have their merits. If I could make a wish, I'd like to see > a shared implementation that marries all the benefits. > Something I love a lot is the ++skin++ traverser for example. I also > like the idea of "tagging" the Request object with structured > information (an interface) to indicate specialisation. > I hate that I have to spell the layer in each ZCML statement. Smells like a "ZIP" to me. ;-) Charlie -- Charlie Clark Managing Director Clark Consulting & Research German Office Kronenstr. 27a Düsseldorf D- 40217 Tel: +49-211-600-3657 Mobile: +49-178-782-6226 ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On 11/16/2011 02:06 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark >> wrote: >>> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro >>> : >>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both confuses the heck out of me. >>> >>> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I >>> think we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser >>> layers, well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think >>> that CMF Skins still offer some functionality that you don't get >>> with browser layers out of the box. >> >> When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die. > > Note that for all their warts, they are *massively* more successful than > the Z3 reimplementation, which was overengineered (I helped with that, > I'm sure). In particular, the exceesive amount of ZCA majyk makes > complicaterd uses of the Z3 skins very fragile (easy to misconfigure, > hard to discover what you broke). But they also have their merits. If I could make a wish, I'd like to see a shared implementation that marries all the benefits. :) Something I love a lot is the ++skin++ traverser for example. I also like the idea of "tagging" the Request object with structured information (an interface) to indicate specialisation. I hate that I have to spell the layer in each ZCML statement. Just my 0.02, Christian -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 2, OK: 45
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > [1]FAILED Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-32bit-linux > https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052701.html This looks like maybe a transient network failure:: > While: Installing test. Getting distribution for > 'zope.app.pagetemplate==3.4.1'. Error: Couldn't find a distribution > for 'zope.app.pagetemplate==3.4.1'. AFIACT, http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.app.pagetemplate/3.4.1 is just fine. > [2]FAILED winbot / zope.app.publisher_py_265_32 > https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052705.html And another:: > Download error: [Errno 10060] A connection attempt failed because the > connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or > established connection failed because connected host has failed to > respond -- Some packages may not be found! Couldn't find index page > for 'zc.buildout' (maybe misspelled?) Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk7DtmAACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7iHACfcPihcr9YdL/vsro583ixqKfl nh8AoNoqbb7k2Cm3tlm/EGvxDkt6QhyW =oQuD -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark > wrote: >> Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro >> : >> >>> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having >>> both confuses the heck out of me. >> >> Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I >> think we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser >> layers, well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think >> that CMF Skins still offer some functionality that you don't get >> with browser layers out of the box. > > When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die. Note that for all their warts, they are *massively* more successful than the Z3 reimplementation, which was overengineered (I helped with that, I'm sure). In particular, the exceesive amount of ZCA majyk makes complicaterd uses of the Z3 skins very fragile (easy to misconfigure, hard to discover what you broke). Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk7DtUkACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ6m1ACfefhRA+UQGJEuFs8DTl/ADj3b IeUAoLcfBcOUTVAw9uLSYxRxdAMYV/An =EJ4l -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark wrote: > Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro : > >> Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both >> confuses the heck out of me. > > Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think > we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers, > well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins > still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out > of the box. When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die. //Lennart ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro : > Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both > confuses the heck out of me. Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers, well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out of the box. Charlie -- Charlie Clark Managing Director Clark Consulting & Research German Office Kronenstr. 27a Düsseldorf D- 40217 Tel: +49-211-600-3657 Mobile: +49-178-782-6226 ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:24, Laurence Rowe wrote: > It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it > wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to > adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various > different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer. Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both confuses the heck out of me. //Lennart ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On 11/16/2011 12:31 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote: > On 16 November 2011 11:30, Christian Theune wrote: > >> Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most >> light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency. > > What is this project? ;-) We're currently sprinting in Berlin to explore a clean-up of the ZMI. We're experimenting a bit with some ideas and I'll make a write-up of what we found in the next days. Technically we're investigating making a separate package that would allow us to remove the old cruft DTML-ZMI and replace it with a small, PT-based Zope4 application that runs in a separate skin. Christian -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On 16 November 2011 11:30, Christian Theune wrote: > Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most > light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency. What is this project? ;-) Martin ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
Hi, On 11/16/2011 12:24 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote: > On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theune wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4. >> >> As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more >> details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature. >> >> From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices >> upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple >> orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to >> leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework. >> >> I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone. > > It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it > wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to > adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various > different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer. I think it was not used by Zope2 itself - however, it's a feature provided by the framework that applications can use. I guess there might be features in a framework that the framework itself doesn't make use of. Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency. Christian -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theune wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4. > > As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more > details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature. > > From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices > upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple > orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to > leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework. > > I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone. It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer. Laurence ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?
Hi, I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4. As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature. From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework. I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone. Christian -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
