-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9 Feb 2007, at 11:03, yuppie wrote:
Taking this into account, how should the five.localsitemanager
thing be packaged?
Maybe we can use the same pattern as TextIndexNG3: The Python
package is shipped in a 'src' subdirectory of the product.
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 9 Feb 2007, at 11:03, yuppie wrote:
Taking this into account, how should the five.localsitemanager thing
be packaged?
Maybe we can use the same pattern as TextIndexNG3: The Python package
is shipped in a 'src' subdirectory of the product. The product's
__init__ adds
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Let's get this discussion back from generic pie-in-the-sky to the
simple situation where we just need this one package integrated into
CMF 2.1, and quickly.
+1
Wichert wants a Plone 3 beta very very soon, there is no time to
switch the CMF to any other
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
I'm not convinced that anything which is this tightly coupled to Zope
needs to be a package, rather than a product. I don't think the
package zealots get the fact that purity is not a win if we have to
distort the rest of the application to satisfy it.
Amen to that.
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7 Feb 2007, at 01:58, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Eggs contain Python packages. How you deploy the Python packages is
your choice. If you like copying or symlinking, fine. And, heck,
you can still symlink your products to Products.
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
I won't grace the uncalled-for sarcasm with an answer. You
misunderstand my point. I simply don't want the existing dead-simple
way of creating quick sandboxes be replaced by some mechanism where I
need to start writing configuration files or learn some
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 7 Feb 2007, at 01:58, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Eggs contain Python packages. How you deploy the Python packages is
your choice. If you like copying or symlinking, fine. And, heck, you
can still symlink your products to Products. Nobody's getting rid of
On Feb 5, 5:40 pm, Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5 Feb 2007, at 19:43, Rocky Burt wrote:
On Feb 2, 4:41 pm, Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, sounds good, I misunderstood your email. I suppose the last bit
left to do now is the custom site manager. Rocky? :)
Yep,
On Feb 6, 5:45 pm, Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right now all you need to do to install CMF is to link all the
contained folders into the instance Products folder. I'm somewhat
averse to complicate that process.
I understand the sentiment and we dealt with the same thing for
Plone.
Am 06.02.2007 um 22:14 schrieb Rocky:
Ultimately the closer we get to structuring our code deployment like
regular python code the easier it will be to take advantage of things
like distutils, eggs, the cheeseshop, etc. I look forward to doing:
easy_install ZopeCMF
I hate eggs and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7 Feb 2007, at 00:36, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Eggs make your life easier, especially if you want to use tools
like workingenv.py or zc.buildout.
Well, for simple work with the CMF like setting up a quick instance
for hacking and development *I
Am 07.02.2007 um 00:36 schrieb Martin Aspeli:
Why? Is it the ability to specify sensible version restrictions?
Have multiple versions of the same package as different
dependencies for different dependents? Automatic downloading of
dependencies where possible/desired? Standardised package
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7 Feb 2007, at 00:36, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Eggs make your life easier, especially if you want to use tools
like workingenv.py or zc.buildout.
Well, for simple work with the CMF like setting up a quick instance
for
Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 07.02.2007 um 00:36 schrieb Martin Aspeli:
Why? Is it the ability to specify sensible version restrictions?
Have multiple versions of the same package as different
dependencies for different dependents? Automatic downloading of
dependencies where possible/desired?
Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 06.02.2007 um 22:14 schrieb Rocky:
Ultimately the closer we get to structuring our code deployment like
regular python code the easier it will be to take advantage of things
like distutils, eggs, the cheeseshop, etc. I look forward to doing:
easy_install ZopeCMF
I
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 7 Feb 2007, at 00:36, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Eggs make your life easier, especially if you want to use tools like
workingenv.py or zc.buildout.
Well, for simple work with the CMF like setting up a quick instance for
hacking and development *I do not want to use any
Martin Aspeli wrote:
I don't think eggs/setuptools are perfect. But I don't think they're
useless either, and on the whole, so far, they've brought more benefits
than problems. By playing with eggs, we're playing better with the rest
of the Python community (and things like entry points are
Rocky wrote:
On Feb 5, 5:40 pm, Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5 Feb 2007, at 19:43, Rocky Burt wrote:
On Feb 2, 4:41 pm, Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, sounds good, I misunderstood your email. I suppose the last bit
left to do now is the custom site manager. Rocky?
On 2/7/07, Charlie Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 07.02.2007 um 00:36 schrieb Martin Aspeli:
Why? Is it the ability to specify sensible version restrictions?
Have multiple versions of the same package as different
dependencies for different dependents? Automatic downloading of
On Feb 2, 4:41 pm, Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, sounds good, I misunderstood your email. I suppose the last bit
left to do now is the custom site manager. Rocky? :)
Yep, looks like I'll be starting on five.localsitemanager pretty
soon. Although I didn't see if we decided
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 2 Feb 2007, at 20:32, yuppie wrote:
I'm going to spend some time this weekend adding unregisterUtility
where needed. Thanks for your help!
That's no longer necessary. I changed the set up / tear down for
non-functional layers. The layers now call
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 22 Jan 2007, at 01:43, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Other than that I have one unrelated failure in the GS tests
themselves and some logger messages coming through, all those smell
like test cleanup issues to me. If I run the
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
I have now finished (well, finished awaiting feedback and help on one
item) the work on the jens_tools_as_utilities branch.
There's one set of test failures out of
CMFActionIcons/tests/test_exportimport that I can't quite interpret. I
believe it has to do with the way
Hi Jens, all!
I haven't seen any progress on the tools as local utilities story for
some time now. Is there anything specific I can help with?
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 22 Nov 2006, at 12:15, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
At the time I wrote this it was kind of experimental and I didn't know
if I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12 Dec 2006, at 00:14, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
I haven't seen any progress on the tools as local utilities story for
some time now. Is there anything specific I can help with?
Sorry, I have a bunch of changes sitting on my computer right now
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
- - There are failing tests in CMFCore.exportimport.tests.test_actions,
basically everything that derives from
CMFCore.exportimport.tests.test_actions._ActionSetup. The insidious
thing is this:
- running all tests or all CMFCore tests shows the failures
Hi Jens, all.
Why did you pick exactly the two weeks where I'm on vacation without an
Internet connection to do this?
Anyways by reading through the mailing list it seems you have figured it
all out by now ;)
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
I have to run off right now, but a quick look over
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 22 Nov 2006, at 12:15, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Why did you pick exactly the two weeks where I'm on vacation
without an
Internet connection to do this?
Very careful planning.
At the time I wrote this it was kind of experimental and I
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Using just the ActionsTool right now in order to get that all set up and
then move to the other tools, I've gotten almost always there, but there
is one set of tests that refuse to run right now, the ones in
CMFCore.exportimport.tests.test_actions which derive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19 Nov 2006, at 16:47, yuppie wrote:
I did not want to step on your toes, so I planned to modernize the
exportimport tests *after* you are done with your local utilities
changes. But I can make this high priority if it should be done
On Sun, 2006-19-11 at 14:37 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Using just the ActionsTool right now in order to get that all set up
and then move to the other tools, I've gotten almost always there,
but there is one set of tests that refuse to run right now, the ones
in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rocky Burt wrote:
On Sun, 2006-19-11 at 14:37 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Using just the ActionsTool right now in order to get that all set up
and then move to the other tools, I've gotten almost always there,
but there is one set of tests
On Sun, 2006-19-11 at 12:59 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
Rocky Burt wrote:
But we shouldn't have to specify ``context=site`` should we?
getUtility should automatically figure out what the nearest chain of
sites should be and look for local utilities in each one of them
automatically no?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19 Nov 2006, at 18:59, Tres Seaver wrote:
Export actions tool.
site = context.getSite()
- -tool = getToolByName(site, 'portal_actions', None)
+tool = getUtility(IActionsTool, context=site)
This looks like it will be
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
So I'm currently stealing^H^H^H^H^H^H^H integrating Hanno's code from
GSLocalAddons into CMFCore and CMFDefault.
AFAICS GSLocalAddons doesn't depend on CMF and might be useful for other
projects as well. Don't know if you did that already, but please add the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14 Nov 2006, at 11:41, yuppie wrote:
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
So I'm currently stealing^H^H^H^H^H^H^H integrating Hanno's code
from GSLocalAddons into CMFCore and CMFDefault.
AFAICS GSLocalAddons doesn't depend on CMF and might be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10 Sep 2006, at 16:08, Tres Seaver wrote:
Rocky Burt wrote:
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 21:57 +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hi guys,
philiKON pointed out something interesting to me the other day - we
could actually register the existing tools as
I am experimenting with that right now, but my z3/Five-Fu ran low
again ;) My problem: calls to zope.component.getUtility
(interface_class) never return anything. Here's the top part (the
bottom is just the old way) of my CMFCore.utils.getToolByName:
Yay!
def
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Now, you can do this with GenericSetup as well, thanks to Hanno. See
http://svn.plone.org/svn/collective/GSLocalAddons/trunk/
The test is informative:
http://svn.plone.org/svn/collective/GSLocalAddons/trunk/tests/
test_components.py
Hanno said
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 13 Nov 2006, at 16:22, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
I have to run off right now, but a quick look over GSLocalAddons
suggests it should be part of the main CMF Default GS profile, and
doing it with GenericSetup certainly is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 13 Nov 2006, at 22:35, Tres Seaver wrote:
My new handler for the component registry is all set up and
registered correctly, and the various import step that calls
importVarious is set as a dependency for the component registry
import step. The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 13 Sep 2006, at 13:06, Miles Waller wrote:
Personally, I'm neutral on moving the requirement for CMF 2.1 to
Zope 2.10. Obviously we're not using any of those new features
yet, but it would be nice to enable their use by mandating 2.10.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10 Sep 2006, at 20:09, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Just out of curiosity, which dependencies does Plone 3.0 have that
require Zope 2.10? Or was it some papal edict to use 2.10?
2.10 really is lovely, because Zope 3.3 is lovely. :)
The local
On Sun, 2006-10-09 at 12:57 +0200, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 9 Sep 2006, at 22:57, Martin Aspeli wrote:
philiKON pointed out something interesting to me the other day - we
could actually register the existing tools as local utilities as of
Zope 2.10. That way, you could do this:
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 21:57 +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hi guys,
philiKON pointed out something interesting to me the other day - we
could actually register the existing tools as local utilities as of Zope
2.10. That way, you could do this:
actions = getUtility(IActionsTool)
as
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10 Sep 2006, at 14:53, Rocky Burt wrote:
This sounds fine, but we'd probably want to wait until we have a CMF
version that does require 2.10, right? HEAD says Zope = 2.9. Unless
we want to work with indirections that know how to do the right
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rocky Burt wrote:
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 21:57 +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hi guys,
philiKON pointed out something interesting to me the other day - we
could actually register the existing tools as local utilities as of Zope
2.10. That way, you
Hi.
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Just out of curiosity, which dependencies does Plone 3.0 have that
require Zope 2.10? Or was it some papal edict to use 2.10?
It was more of an edict, to catch up with the latest versions of our
underlying frameworks again.
The two things we are actually relying on
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10 Sep 2006, at 14:53, Rocky Burt wrote:
This sounds fine, but we'd probably want to wait until we have a CMF
version that does require 2.10, right? HEAD says Zope = 2.9. Unless
we want to work with indirections that know
49 matches
Mail list logo
