Log message for revision 65667:
This version of PageTemplateFile seems to work fine although
it requires further testing.
The implementation uses its own Engine and traverse since browser
pages configured through ZCML are looked up by a bobo_traverse()
hack. However the standdard
Log message for revision 65670:
added preliminary code to make implementation work with the Zope 3 ZPT
implementation on ajung-final-zpt-integration branch
Changed:
U Products.Five/trunk/browser/pagetemplatefile.py
-=-
Modified: Products.Five/trunk/browser/pagetemplatefile.py
Log message for revision 65672:
moved custom traverser into Five
Changed:
U
Zope/branches/ajung-final-zpt-integration/lib/python/Products/PageTemplates/PageTemplateFile.py
-=-
Modified:
Zope/branches/ajung-final-zpt-integration/lib/python/Products/PageTemplates/PageTemplateFile.py
Log message for revision 65675:
i renamed the view name last night
Changed:
U Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/component.txt
-=-
Modified:
Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/component.txt
Log message for revision 65676:
More catching up with the renaming
Changed:
U Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/component.txt
U
Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/customizetemplate.pt
-=-
Modified:
Log message for revision 65677:
rename variable obj - site
don't reacquire the zpt object
Changed:
U Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/browser.py
-=-
Modified: Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/browser.py
Log message for revision 65680:
some import were missing
Changed:
U
Zope/branches/ajung-final-zpt-integration/lib/python/Products/PageTemplates/PageTemplateFile.py
-=-
Modified:
Zope/branches/ajung-final-zpt-integration/lib/python/Products/PageTemplates/PageTemplateFile.py
Log message for revision 65681:
fixed traverser
Changed:
U Products.Five/trunk/browser/pagetemplatefile.py
-=-
Modified: Products.Five/trunk/browser/pagetemplatefile.py
===
---
Log message for revision 65682:
Use Products.PageTemplates.ZopePageTemplate instead of
zope.app.zptpage.ZPTPage
because the things we put in an ObjectManager really need to be SimpleItems
(grrr).
Slightly refactored the view factory (local function instead of class).
Also introduced a
Log message for revision 65688:
get the template top-level variable namespace right and test it.
improve some of the explanations in the doctest.
Changed:
UU Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/browser.py
U
Log message for revision 65689:
expand the id keyword
Changed:
_U Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/tests.py
-=-
Property changes on:
Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/tests.py
Log message for revision 65693:
Take the original view class for the 'view' object. In order to find it, we
look for it at the global level (which might not be enough in the future). For
this to work we also need to remember its view name.
Changed:
U
Log message for revision 65694:
Remind myself that we're not doing everything we might have to yet.
Changed:
U Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/browser.py
-=-
Modified: Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/browser.py
Log message for revision 65701:
One action is enough.
Changed:
U
Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/customizetemplate.pt
-=-
Modified:
Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/customizetemplate.pt
Log message for revision 65703:
ugh, wrong base classes
Changed:
U Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/browser.py
-=-
Modified: Products.Five/branches/philikon-local-components/component/browser.py
Log message for revision 65715:
Use the Zope2 TALES engine to support Zope2-compatible TALES traversal.
If that is going to go away, then this will have to be done differently,
but at least this fixes several issues where the z3-style PageTemplate
implementation didn't do everything that
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 06:51, Martijn Faassen wrote:
snip great discussion
I think we can just carry on this message.
I could not agree more. I have nothing to add at this point.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 00:33, Jeff Shell wrote:
All of these big features are neat and well. But I want less. I don't
know how to use less. There are dependencies on zope.app creeping into
packages allowed in zope.*, and I understand that more of that is
likely to happen in the future. And
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 07:39, Martijn Faassen wrote:
I know I sound conservative here, but I'm actually happy with the way
things are working now. Let's not fix what isn't broken. We can make
incremental steps to making it better, and I'm glad people are starting
to understand the ideas
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 11:00, Jim Fulton wrote:
Zope 2 is more mature than Zope 3 in a lot of areas. WebDAV
and process management are a couple of examples that occur to me
off the top of my head.
Except that Michael Kerrins recent WebDAV work will shaddow Zope 2's support.
If I
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 12:33, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Are you kidding?
No, I'm not kidding.
+1 on the entire post from me too. And I would really like to see the
questions he raised answered.
We just recovered from this BBB overpromise, now we want to make another one.
We also just
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:12:08AM -0500, Stephan Richter wrote:
| On Tuesday 28 February 2006 11:00, Jim Fulton wrote:
| Zope 2 is more mature than Zope 3 in a lot of areas. WebDAV
| and process management are a couple of examples that occur to me
| off the top of my head.
|
| Except that
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:24, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| Except that Michael Kerrins recent WebDAV work will shaddow Zope 2's
| support. If I understand his improved implementation correctly, then it
| is very, very cool!
Did you run the litmus tests against it? :)
I don't know what that
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:29:05AM -0500, Stephan Richter wrote:
| On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:24, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| | Except that Michael Kerrins recent WebDAV work will shaddow Zope 2's
| | support. If I understand his improved implementation correctly, then it
| | is very, very
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:32, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
What you think about turning those into functional doctests?
Of course a very, very big +1. :-)
Though I woul split them up, so that we can only test features that we know we
have implemented.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
CBU
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 14:32, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:29:05AM -0500, Stephan Richter wrote:
| On Wednesday 01 March 2006 09:24, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| | Except that Michael Kerrins recent WebDAV work will shaddow Zope 2's
| | support. If I understand his
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 17:29 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip]
I see Zope 5 being a combination of Zope 2 and Zope 3, keeping
the best of both.
I think we already have Zope 5, and it's called Zope 2.9.
Perhaps I'm wrong.
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 12:33, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Are you kidding?
No, I'm not kidding.
+1 on the entire post from me too. And I would really like to see the
questions he raised answered.
OK, done.
We just recovered from this BBB overpromise,
What are
On 3/1/06, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's your point? That we shouldn't plan? That we shouldn't
have a common vision for where we're going, or communicate that
vision?
Well, not neccesarily. Things change, and the plan for the future has
not always been the same. The important
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 3/1/06, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's your point? That we shouldn't plan? That we shouldn't
have a common vision for where we're going, or communicate that
vision?
Well, not neccesarily. Things change, and the plan for the future has
not always been
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:06, Jim Fulton wrote:
I don't see how *saying* what Zope 5 will contain will make it *exist*
any time sooner.
You seem to be arguing against a roadmap, which is puzzling.
I don't think Martijn is arguing against a roadmap, he just
On 3/1/06, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lennart Regebro wrote:
Well, not neccesarily. Things change, and the plan for the future has
not always been the same. The important part is that we work in the
same direction.
How is that possible if we don't communicate the vision?
In the
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 07:39, Martijn Faassen wrote:
I know I sound conservative here, but I'm actually happy with the way
things are working now. Let's not fix what isn't broken. We can make
incremental steps to making it better, and I'm glad people are
Jens Vagelpohl schrieb:
Zac has asked to step back a bit as the contact for the project and I
told him I could take over that part. That includes things like release
stewardship.
One of the items that had been on my list for a while was to move both
the download area as well as the
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:07:22 +, Chris Withers wrote:
I hate to say it in this context, but not if it's Plone based. Once
bitten, twice shy and all that. Plone was the big promise for the
current zope.org and it simply hasn't delivered...
Yes, Chris, your great love for Plone is
Simon Michael wrote:
Doing nothing means that we are stuck with a broken and unmaintained
Plone
1 site as our public face for awhile longer. I don't think any of us
really want that.
I piggyback on Geoff's insightful post and say the same thing about
Zwiki. It's bad marketing for the
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 21:21:02 +0100, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
May i suggest you have a look at
http://codespeak.net/svn/z3/zopeweb/trunk/project.txt ?
I'd like to invite you to join the effort - but I don't want to think
about forking zope.org and i immediately loose interest when you
Geoff Davis geoff at phds.org writes:
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 17:11:00 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 3/1/06, Geoff Davis geoff at phds.org wrote:
Are there good CPS analogues to PloneSoftwareCenter / PloneHelpCenter?
I doubt it, although I have no idea what they do.
They run
Jens Vagelpohl jens at dataflake.org writes:
This isn't as easy as it seems, and simple provisioning of manpower
is only one small part.
snip red tape
That's so incredibly stupid I can't believe no-one's ever done anything about
it. Considering that Zope is largely community-maintained,
On 1 Mar 2006, at 23:45, Geoff Davis wrote:
The issues I am more concerned about are the social / political
ones. The
signature issue is interesting, but probably surmountable -- all Plone
contributors are required to sign a contributor agreement.
But don't forget - this agreement is with
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 19:07:38 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
Thanks for your response. If we set something up and make it live for
testing / feedback, is there a good way to avoid copyright / trademark
headaches?
I suppose. What sort of copyright / trademark headaches?
Zope Corp owns the Zope
Geoff,
Daily several of us (Michael, Martijn F, Phillip V, and a couple others)
utilize #zope-web to try and further work that has been going on for
awhile to get a suitable zope.org rolled out and upgraded that the
community can be proud of. There are people working on docs, marketing
data,
Alric Aneron schrieb:
Hello,
I see I can only execute python functions in external methods.
Is there any way to execute the whole file, not just a certain
function? In linux I created a python script, and it doesn't have
functions. I just want to execute the whole file. I tried using self
Ed Colmar wrote:
My process in moving over the product from the old server was to blame.
Here's what I did: export all of the zodb contents,
Why would you do this?!
and un-tarred the product. This resulted in the error of not finding
the python methods, even though it appeard to be
Hello,
sorry to come up with this again. I startet 2 pretty confused threads on the
same problem allready:
[Zope] Error Value: 'File' object has no attribute
'manage_fixupOwnershipAfterAdd'
Re: [Zope] context in fs product
Unfortunatly I'm still not getting it right.
I
+---[ Roman Klesel ]--
| Hello,
| class ZLTMS(Lasttest,Implicit, Persistent, PropertyManager, ObjectManager,
SimpleItem):
| ZLMTS object
|
| ... has an import method
|
| def newLasttest(self, REQUEST=None):
|new
|
Hello Andrew,
Andrew Milton schrieb:
Are you sure your genId() method works?
Well, yes, it does what it's ment to do. It generates an id, a string.
Here it is:
def genId(self,context):
asdf
items = [ int(e[2:]) for e in context.objectIds('Folder') ]
Andrew Milton schrieb:
Did you paste this code, because it has errors...
Ahh sorry, I missed the last charakter, a ).
Here it is again:
def genId(self,context):
asdf
items = [ int(e[2:]) for e in context.objectIds('Folder') ]
if items ==
Hi.
I am writing an external application and I need to modify owner and
permissions of zope files from that app. I thought about using HTTP
object publishing or XML-RPC, so I checked documentation at
http://www.plope.com/Books/2_7Edition/AppendixB.stx#2-45 but I can't
find any method to deal with
*Everything* you can do in the ZMI, you can also do from code. Most
of it even via XML-RPC. In case a method you want does not publish
nicely to XML-RPC, write a helper script in Zope and RPC that one.
Also, install DocFinderTab for all the API doc needs you may have.
Stefan
On 1. Mär
ok, thanks. I didn't notice the documentation on your site.
On 2/28/06, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
michael nt milne wrote at 2006-2-28 15:51 +:
I'm probably missing something really obvious but am wondering how you
actually implement your product on a live plone site. I've got
Roman Klesel wrote at 2006-3-1 13:24 +0100:
...
I can call this method on whatever folder inside the product instance I want,
it will always return the id of the
product and not the id of the product I call it on.
I fear you will need to more clearly describe what you mean
with the product (on
Marek 'MMx' Ludha wrote at 2006-3-1 17:32 +0100:
I am writing an external application and I need to modify owner and
permissions of zope files from that app. I thought about using HTTP
object publishing or XML-RPC, so I checked documentation at
Dieter Maurer schrieb:
I can call this method on whatever folder inside the product instance I want,
it will always return the id of the
product and not the id of the product I call it on.
I fear you will need to more clearly describe what you mean
with the product (on one hand) and the
54 matches
Mail list logo
