Hi team mates,
just a quick question regarding how we want to organize the
review:
While the deadline for submission is only next Saturday
(Jan 19) we do already have some PLIP implementations submitted:
http://dev.plone.org/plone/browser/review/plip195-dependencies
I have completed implementation of PLIP 195. Aside from a number of
cleanups and bugfixes there is one important change:
the GenericSetup setup tool now has a separate method to calculate the
dependency chain for a profile. CMFQuickInstaller has been updated to
use this method to check if all
Raphael Ritz wrote:
Ideally, everyone from the team should look at everything but
often this simply doesn't work out so we might want to make sure
we spit the work such that all PLIPs get consideration from at
least two or three team members. Questions or issues arising
should of course be
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Raphael Ritz wrote:
Ideally, everyone from the team should look at everything but
often this simply doesn't work out so we might want to make sure
we spit the work such that all PLIPs get consideration from at
least two or three team members. Questions or issues arising
Raphael Ritz wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
I have completed implementation of PLIP 195. Aside from a number of
cleanups and bugfixes there is one important change:
the GenericSetup setup tool now has a separate method to calculate
the dependency chain for a profile. CMFQuickInstaller has been
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Ho ho ho,
I'd like to officially submit for consideration for Plone 3.1 a bundle
that comprises the following PLIPs (in separate packages):
- PLIP 184 - additional portlets (has a dependency on PLIP 200)
- PLIP 200 - Kupu formlib widget
Hi Martin,
just playing with
Raphael Ritz wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
2. Not sure it's the best possible UI to completely hide a
product if a dependency is missing.
[...]
I'ld like some input from Hanno on that. What I did was update the
isInstallable method in the quickinstaller tool, which seemed the
logical place
Raphael Ritz wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Ho ho ho,
I'd like to officially submit for consideration for Plone 3.1 a bundle
that comprises the following PLIPs (in separate packages):
- PLIP 184 - additional portlets (has a dependency on PLIP 200)
- PLIP 200 - Kupu formlib widget
Hi
Previously Raphael Ritz wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Ho ho ho,
I'd like to officially submit for consideration for Plone 3.1 a bundle
that comprises the following PLIPs (in separate packages):
- PLIP 184 - additional portlets (has a dependency on PLIP 200)
- PLIP 200 - Kupu formlib
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Raphael Ritz wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Ho ho ho,
I'd like to officially submit for consideration for Plone 3.1 a bundle
that comprises the following PLIPs (in separate packages):
- PLIP 184 - additional portlets (has a dependency on PLIP 200)
- PLIP
for the record (as a framework team member) i'd like to support martin
on this issue.
the formlib wysiwyg support is a *new* feature, and if it happens to
*not* work for fckeditor, eventhough wysiwg support used to work for
kupu *and* fckeditor prior to formlib, then that's
On 15.01.2008, at 22:43, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Raphael Ritz wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
2. Not sure it's the best possible UI to completely hide a
product if a dependency is missing.
[...]
I'ld like some input from Hanno on that. What I did was update the
isInstallable method in the
Martin Aspeli wrote:
[..]
I agree, but this may just as well be a bug in FCKeditor. Since that's
not part of Plone core, it's a bit hard to account for it (we can't
test every third party product). That said, we do want this release to
be nice on third party products, so we should fix it.
13 matches
Mail list logo
