On Jun 18, 2008, at 20:30 , yuppie wrote:
The current Zope 2 policy doesn't make sure the change history of
unreleased versions is complete. But that's no essential part of
that policy. And working with unreleased versions you might use
subversion anyway.
See, I think that's bad. The
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:09:17PM +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote:
[...]
If I know I normally only have to check the bottom (or top) of each
section to see whether something got added since last time I checked,
there's less chance I'll miss it and make a mistake.
It's not a major point,
On Jun 19, 2008, at 09:51 , Christian Theune wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 09:08:54AM +0200, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
See, I think that's bad. The change log should reflect all changes,
be
it in a released version or from Subversion. Or be it a release
branch
or the trunk.
Please note
It's helpful to post your responses to the mailing list, that way when
someone else has a similar problem in the future they'll be able to
find the information.
Inheriting from Persistent is also necessary to control the
granularity of the database. Persistent objects are saved as separate
Sorry, wrong list.
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
Hi!
Second try. My first response to this lead to a discussion about
immediate or delayed syncing of CHANGES.txt. That was not my point.
Christian Theune wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:20:17AM -0400, Fred Drake wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Christophe Combelles [EMAIL
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Wed Jun 18 11:00:00 2008 UTC to Thu Jun 19 11:00:00 2008 UTC.
There were 5 messages: 5 from Zope Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Wed Jun 18 20:53:49 EDT 2008
URL:
On Jun 19, 2008, at 12:32 , yuppie wrote:
There is always *one* well defined current maintenance branch.
Version numbering *does* imply a time line if you ignore old
maintenance branches. It's not hard at all to get this right.
I don't think that assumption holds true. Again, using the
Malthe Borch wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
There's one major problem that I see. What's the backwards
compatibility story? I'm sure there are a lot of cases in lots of code
where people look up views with a getMultiAdapter, and if we started
registering views differently, wouldn't that code
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Jun 19, 2008, at 12:32 , yuppie wrote:
There is always *one* well defined current maintenance branch. Version
numbering *does* imply a time line if you ignore old maintenance
branches. It's not hard at all to get this right.
I don't think that assumption holds true.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christian Theune wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:09:17PM +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote:
[...]
If I know I normally only have to check the bottom (or top) of each
section to see whether something got added since last time I checked,
On Jun 19, 2008, at 13:36 , yuppie wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Jun 19, 2008, at 12:32 , yuppie wrote:
There is always *one* well defined current maintenance branch.
Version numbering *does* imply a time line if you ignore old
maintenance branches. It's not hard at all to get this
Tres Seaver wrote:
Christian Theune wrote:
[snip]
My preference would be to have more important changes first.
Please don't make it a judgement call: keep it time-descending order,
just like the releases. Among other things, this makes merge conflicts
more obvious, and easier to to fix.
On Jun 19, 2008, at 14:41 , Martijn Faassen wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Christian Theune wrote:
[snip]
My preference would be to have more important changes first.
Please don't make it a judgement call: keep it time-descending
order,
just like the releases. Among other things, this makes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Christian Theune wrote:
[snip]
My preference would be to have more important changes first.
Please don't make it a judgement call: keep it time-descending order,
just like the releases. Among other
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Jun 19, 2008, at 13:36 , yuppie wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Jun 19, 2008, at 12:32 , yuppie wrote:
There is always *one* well defined current maintenance branch.
Version numbering *does* imply a time line if you ignore old
maintenance branches. It's not hard at
David Glick wrote:
On Jun 18, 2008, at 1:44 PM, Malthe Borch wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
There's one major problem that I see. What's the backwards
compatibility story? I'm sure there are a lot of cases in lots of
code where people look up views with a getMultiAdapter, and if we
started
On Jun 19, 2008, at 9:37 AM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
David Glick wrote:
On Jun 18, 2008, at 1:44 PM, Malthe Borch wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
There's one major problem that I see. What's the backwards
compatibility story? I'm sure there are a lot of cases in lots of
code where
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 09:46:35AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
I suggest:
- decide on and advertise the new interface
- continue to do look ups the way we do now
- update relevant zcml directives (view, page, resource. etc.) to use
the new interface
- issue informative deprecation
On Jun 19, 2008, at 10:46 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 09:46:35AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
I suggest:
- decide on and advertise the new interface
- continue to do look ups the way we do now
- update relevant zcml directives (view, page, resource. etc.) to use
the new
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:50:00AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
Would it be reasonable to also issue a warning if someone does a
lookup for
Interface?
No, because clients have to look up using Interface as long as the
component they need might be registered with it.
Is that an argument for
On Jun 19, 2008, at 10:53 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:50:00AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
Would it be reasonable to also issue a warning if someone does a
lookup for
Interface?
No, because clients have to look up using Interface as long as the
component they need
Hi there,
I've made zope.sqlalchemy work with SQLAlchemy 0.5 beta 1, recently
released.
This involved:
* the 'transactional=True' argument has become 'autocommit=False'
* various accesses that the tests were doing to get query.table and such
didn't work anymore. I replaced them with direct
Hi there,
I'd like to announce my contribution for the expanding list of options
for SQLAlchemy integration for Zope 3.
I've just implemented a package called z3c.saconfig which implements a
utility-based way to set up SQLAlchemy's scoped session, as discussed
recently on this.
The
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
I've made zope.sqlalchemy work with SQLAlchemy 0.5 beta 1, recently
released.
This involved:
* the 'transactional=True' argument has become 'autocommit=False'
* various accesses that the tests were doing to get query.table and such
didn't work anymore. I
Hey,
Laurence Rowe wrote:
[snip]
I've made the branch backwards compatible with 0.4 and merged to trunk.
I'd like to keep compatibility while we can.
Yeah, looks good, thanks!
Regards,
Martijn
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
Hey,
Martijn Faassen wrote:
I intend to add support for a local utility soon,
inspired by some code sent to me by Hermann Himmelbauer.
This is now in there. It only looks faintly like Hermann's code, but it
was still very useful.
You can register an engine factory globally or locally. This
--On 15. Juni 2008 13:25:51 +0200 Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On 15. Juni 2008 06:16:52 -0500 Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Jun 15, 2008, at 06:09 , Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 15. Juni 2008 06:04:37 -0500 Jens Vagelpohl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO seeing
On Jun 19, 2008, at 20:53 , Andreas Jung wrote:
I am logged in as ajung.
http://zope.org/Products/Zope/2.11.0
shows up with all Plohn edit options.
http://zope.org/Products/Zope/2.10.6/
does not.
Even worser:
wget http://zope.org/Products/Zope/2.11.0/folder_contents;
returns the page from
On Jun 19, 2008, at 2:59 PM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Jun 19, 2008, at 20:53 , Andreas Jung wrote:
I am logged in as ajung.
http://zope.org/Products/Zope/2.11.0
shows up with all Plohn edit options.
http://zope.org/Products/Zope/2.10.6/
does not.
Even worser:
wget
Hi all.
In the doc/ZODB3.txt of Zope 2.8 (and Zope 2.9) I've found the
following paragraph.
ZODB 3 and Zope Database Adapters
Most database adapters are *currently* likely to be problematic unless
the underlying extensions and libraries:
- allow multiple simultaneous database
Thanks a lot..It worked..
Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On 18. Juni 2008 10:14:10 +0100 sujitha mary
wrote:
Hi,
I need to open and display an HTML file in zope.For that I uploaded the
file as DTML document and tried to retrieve it from a page template.this
is code which i
Tres Seaver wrote at 2008-6-15 16:18 -0400:
...
The Catalog tab in my catalog says this:
The catalog mycatalog contains 30,345 record(s) in the path /.
But when I sort and return a list of cataloged objects I only have 19,881.
Here is the script call to retrieve the records:
--On 19. Juni 2008 20:35:29 +0200 Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote at 2008-6-15 16:18 -0400:
...
The Catalog tab in my catalog says this:
The catalog mycatalog contains 30,345 record(s) in the path /.
But when I sort and return a list of cataloged objects I only
Rob Miller wrote at 2008-6-17 15:47 -0700:
...
Traceback (most recent call last):
/home/rob/topp/14000/builds/20080611/opencore/lib/zope/lib/python/ZODB/serialize.py,
line 407, in serialize
return self._dump(meta, obj.__getstate__())
File
35 matches
Mail list logo
