Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 23 Feb 2007, at 00:39, Rocky wrote: So... what's next? Figuring out how to deal with existing sites that need to be modified on the fly somehow so they don't break completely. jens -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Martin Aspeli
Jens Vagelpohl wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 23 Feb 2007, at 00:39, Rocky wrote: So... what's next? Figuring out how to deal with existing sites that need to be modified on the fly somehow so they don't break completely. Does CMF core not have any kind of

[Zope-CMF] CMF Collector: Open Issues

2007-02-23 Thread tseaver
The following supporters have open issues assigned to them in this collector (http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF). Assigned and Open mhammond - Windows DevelopmentMode penalty in CMFCore.DirectoryView, [Accepted] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/366 yuppie - support

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread yuppie
Hi! Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On 23 Feb 2007, at 00:39, Rocky wrote: So... what's next? Figuring out how to deal with existing sites that need to be modified on the fly somehow so they don't break completely. I propose to hardcode PortalObjectBase as IObjectManagerSite. AFAICS

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On 23 Feb 2007, at 00:39, Rocky wrote: So... what's next? Figuring out how to deal with existing sites that need to be modified on the fly somehow so they don't break completely. I propose to hardcode

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Martin Aspeli
Jens Vagelpohl wrote: After reading Phillip's book I really like Zope 3 generations, but I have no idea if that mechanism could be used at all. I had a look at it and started thinking about a CMFish version. The main challenge is that generates just get the app root as a handle, so you

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Charlie Clark
Am 23.02.2007 um 12:52 schrieb Tres Seaver: Hmm, I won't quibble about migration code. +1. +1 me neither For registering the tools as utilities you still need to run the componentregistry import step. I would not use on-the-fly magic for that part, I think people should do that

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread yuppie
Hi! Tres Seaver wrote: yuppie wrote: Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On 23 Feb 2007, at 00:39, Rocky wrote: So... what's next? Figuring out how to deal with existing sites that need to be modified on the fly somehow so they don't break completely. I propose to hardcode PortalObjectBase as

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Rocky
On Feb 23, 8:10 am, yuppie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I propose to hardcode PortalObjectBase as IObjectManagerSite. AFAICS getSiteManager() could create a component registry on the fly if necessary. So for that part we would neither need the new code in importVarious nor migration code. While

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread yuppie
Rocky wrote: On Feb 23, 8:10 am, yuppie y.20...-E2EsyBC0hj3+aS/[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I propose to hardcode PortalObjectBase as IObjectManagerSite. AFAICS getSiteManager() could create a component registry on the fly if necessary. So for that part we would neither need the new code in

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Rocky
On Feb 23, 10:15 am, yuppie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rocky wrote: http://svn.zope.org/?rev=72782view=rev I just added notify(BeforeTraverseEvent(self, REQUEST)) to DynamicType's __before_publishing_traverse__. Hmm... ok, which sounds like we've done away with the need to call

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: Hi! Tres Seaver wrote: yuppie wrote: Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On 23 Feb 2007, at 00:39, Rocky wrote: So... what's next? Figuring out how to deal with existing sites that need to be modified on the fly somehow so they don't

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread yuppie
Hi Rocky! Rocky wrote: Done. five.localsitemanager is now included with CMFCore on the jens branch. There aren't any CMF specific tests in place for any of this, but the CMFCore tests all run fine with sys.path stuff setup (they failed when I misconfigured things). So... what's next?

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Rocky
On Feb 23, 1:52 pm, yuppie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe I'm missing something. But wasn't a major goal of five.localsitemanager to return acquisition wrapped tools? I can't find any code in five.localsitemanager that deals with that issue. So we now have support for nested sites, but still

[Zope-CMF] Re: Five's local sitemanager, CMF, etc

2007-02-23 Thread Martin Aspeli
yuppie wrote: Hi Rocky! Rocky wrote: Done. five.localsitemanager is now included with CMFCore on the jens branch. There aren't any CMF specific tests in place for any of this, but the CMFCore tests all run fine with sys.path stuff setup (they failed when I misconfigured things). So...