Summary of messages to the cmf-tests list.
Period Sat Dec 29 12:00:00 2007 UTC to Sun Dec 30 12:00:00 2007 UTC.
There were 11 messages: 11 from CMF Unit Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : CMF-1.5 Zope-2.7 Python-2.3.6 : Linux
From: CMF Unit Tests
Date: Sat Dec 29 21:27:28 EST
Hi!
Laurence Rowe wrote:
For the upcoming Plone 3.1 release, we have two PLIPs aimed at
adapterizing workflow lookup: http://plone.org/products/plone/roadmap/217
-1
I don't understand the need for this. The workflow tool shipped with
CMFCore implements IConfigurableWorkflowTool. It is
Tres Seaver wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Dec 29, 2007, at 18:28 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
For the small number of CMF parts I'm +1 for individual eggs.
I understood both comments as positive votes and have done the dirty
work of moving CMF trunk into separate parts now. I haven't moved the
yuppie wrote:
snip/
and adapterizing workflow status and history:
http://plone.org/products/roadmap/221
+1
I just would prefer named adapters over multi-adapters. And deprecate
getHistoryOf, setStatusOf and getStatusOf.
The problem with using named adapters is that it becomes necessary to
Laurence Rowe wrote:
yuppie wrote:
snip/
and adapterizing workflow status and history:
http://plone.org/products/roadmap/221
+1
I just would prefer named adapters over multi-adapters. And deprecate
getHistoryOf, setStatusOf and getStatusOf.
The problem with using named adapters is that it
On Dec 30, 2007, at 19:08 , Dieter Maurer wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote at 2007-12-29 19:03 +0100:
...
- CMFCore (the foundation which may be used by itself to develop
other kinds of portal software)
- CMFDefault + DCWorkflow + (maybe) CMFTopic (a finished sample
for a CMFCore-based portal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Dec 29, 2007, at 18:28 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
For the small number of CMF parts I'm +1 for individual eggs.
I understood both comments as positive votes and have done the
