Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: [dev] listFilteredActionsFor performance

2005-05-04 Thread Andreas Jung
--On Mittwoch, 4. Mai 2005 20:58 Uhr +0200 Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hm, the queries used for worklists are quite trivial. In principle, they should be fast (at least if they would not include the horribly inefficient "effective/expires" subquery automatically added by the Catalog

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: [dev] listFilteredActionsFor performance

2005-05-04 Thread Dieter Maurer
Tres Seaver wrote at 2005-4-25 15:11 -0400: > ... >> So it's hard to measure performance. But in general most time is spent >> in expressions and in the WorkflowTool. Within the WorkflowTool, >> worklists are by far the most expensive Actions. > >... because they involve catalog queries. We could

Re: [Zope-CMF] DCWorkflow using workflow variables in guards expressions

2005-05-04 Thread Dieter Maurer
Konstantin E. Steuck wrote at 2005-4-21 16:20 +0700: > ... >While browsing thru DCWorkflow docs I thought I found perfect way to do >this by creating state variable called 'user' and setting it to whatever >I need. Then guard expression checks if current user is the one who has >been assigned to

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Zope 2.7.5 and proxy role for workflow scripts

2005-05-04 Thread Dieter Maurer
Duncan Booth wrote at 2005-4-12 13:38 +: > ... >>>Unauthorized: The owner of the executing script is defined outside the >>>context of the object being accessed. > ... >A very expressive but not terribly useful error message! > >I just had exactly the same error message (except obviously for t

Re: [Zope-CMF] Use unicode or string (char encoding?) for CMF content?

2005-05-04 Thread Dieter Maurer
Petri Savolainen wrote at 2005-4-20 12:19 -0700: > ... >The question becomes, does CMF 1.4.x / do its content types fully >support using unicode? There is only very limited unicode support. ZPublisher supports a set of "unicode" type conversions (causing UTF-8 encoded data to be converted to uni

Re: [Zope-CMF] Subversion?

2005-05-04 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On May 4, 2005, at 3:54 , Chris McDonough wrote: - bdb tends to need recovery from time to time and I'm not sure of the feasibility of filesystem-based Subversion repos, and CVS really doesn't have this issue. That's one of the biggest reasons why I would not want to be involved in administer

Re: [Zope-CMF] Subversion?

2005-05-04 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On May 4, 2005, at 3:44 , Florent Guillaume wrote: Well it would make things homogenous with the rest of Zope and Zope-related projects. And you could do checkouts of Zope + CMF or Plone + CMF or CPS + CMF with only a few well placed svn:externals in one command. You're slightly contradicting you

Re: [Zope-CMF] Subversion?

2005-05-04 Thread Florent Guillaume
Hasn't ZC moded to fsfs ? It's as easy to setup as bdb and doesn't have the "getting stuck" problem. fsfs is used in production in many places now. Florent Chris McDonough wrote: > I have two observations: > > - bdb tends to need recovery from time to time and I'm not sure of the > feasibility

Re: [Zope-CMF] Subversion?

2005-05-04 Thread Chris McDonough
I have two observations: - bdb tends to need recovery from time to time and I'm not sure of the feasibility of filesystem-based Subversion repos, and CVS really doesn't have this issue. - If we put something in Subversion and keep something in CVS, merging becomes a chore. All of the code

Re: [Zope-CMF] Subversion?

2005-05-04 Thread Florent Guillaume
Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > How about migrating CMF to subversion too? I'd say, 1.5 and HEAD. > > To be honest, I don't see the point in that. Well it would make things homogenous with the rest of Zope and Zope-related projects. And you could do checkouts of Zope + CMF or Plone

Re: [Zope-CMF] Subversion?

2005-05-04 Thread Zainab Ackom-Mensah
why would we want to do that? what are the pros and cons? - Original Message - From: "Florent Guillaume" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Zope-CMF List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 3:28 PM Subject: [Zope-CMF] Subversion? How about migrating CMF to subversion too? I'd say, 1.5

Re: [Zope-CMF] Subversion?

2005-05-04 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On May 4, 2005, at 11:09 , Stefan H. Holek wrote: +1 here Once you start working with svn you will quickly realize how annoying cvs can be, Jens ;-) That's the argumentation I don't like. "It's better" means nothing to me. You need to keep in mind that there are two groups of people affected

Re: [Zope-CMF] Subversion?

2005-05-04 Thread Stefan H. Holek
+1 here Once you start working with svn you will quickly realize how annoying cvs can be, Jens ;-) Stefan On 3. Mai 2005, at 19:20, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On May 3, 2005, at 4:28 , Florent Guillaume wrote: How about migrating CMF to subversion too? I'd say, 1.5 and HEAD. To be honest, I don't see

[Zope-CMF] CMF Collector: Open Issues

2005-05-04 Thread tseaver
The following supporters have open issues assigned to them in this collector (http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF). Assigned and Open efge - "DirectoryView.__of__ causes ConflictError", [Accepted] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/347 - "CMFSetup doesn't correctly detect DCWork