[Zope-CMF] CMF Collector: Open Issues

2007-02-26 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 Pending / Deferred Issues

[Zope-CMF] CMF Tests: 8 OK, 1 Failed

2007-02-26 Thread CMF Tests Summarizer
Summary of messages to the cmf-tests list. Period Sun Feb 25 12:00:00 2007 UTC to Mon Feb 26 12:00:00 2007 UTC. There were 9 messages: 9 from CMF Unit Tests. Test failures - Subject: FAILED (failures=1) : CMF-1.6 Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: CMF Unit Tests Date: Sun Feb 25

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

2007-02-26 Thread Rocky
On Feb 23, 3:50 pm, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yuppie wrote: Maybe I'm missing something. But wasn't a major goal of five.localsitemanager to return acquisition wrapped tools? That was my understanding, too. I thought this would just mean aq_base'ing the utility and aq-wrapping

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

2007-02-26 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Rocky wrote: On Feb 23, 3:50 pm, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yuppie wrote: Maybe I'm missing something. But wasn't a major goal of five.localsitemanager to return acquisition wrapped tools? That was my understanding, too. I thought this would just mean aq_base'ing the utility and

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

2007-02-26 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Rocky wrote: On Feb 23, 3:50 pm, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yuppie wrote: Maybe I'm missing something. But wasn't a major goal of five.localsitemanager to return acquisition wrapped tools? That was my understanding, too. I thought this would just mean aq_base'ing the utility and

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

2007-02-26 Thread Martin Aspeli
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Rocky wrote: On Feb 23, 3:50 pm, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yuppie wrote: Maybe I'm missing something. But wasn't a major goal of five.localsitemanager to return acquisition wrapped tools? That was my understanding, too. I thought this would

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

2007-02-26 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Rocky wrote: On Feb 23, 3:50 pm, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yuppie wrote: Maybe I'm missing something. But wasn't a major goal of five.localsitemanager to return acquisition wrapped tools? That was my

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

2007-02-26 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Rocky wrote: On Feb 23, 3:50 pm, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yuppie wrote: Maybe I'm missing something. But wasn't a major goal of five.localsitemanager to return acquisition wrapped

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

2007-02-26 Thread Martin Aspeli
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Rocky wrote: On Feb 23, 3:50 pm, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yuppie wrote: Maybe I'm missing something. But wasn't a major goal of

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

2007-02-26 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Rocky wrote: On Feb 23, 3:50 pm, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yuppie wrote: Maybe I'm missing

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

2007-02-26 Thread Martin Aspeli
Tres Seaver wrote: Adapters and subscription adapters should not be acquisition wrapped. They darn well better be able to get a wrapped context (which means that the event *must* have a wrapped attribute) or they will be less than useless. That's something else. Adapters and subscription

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

2007-02-26 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
On 26 Feb 2007, at 23:48 , Tres Seaver wrote: I nowhere said anything about deprecation. All meant was to discourage relying on acquisition when developing new tools. I think that deserves a comment (I suggested nothing more). No deprecation warning or anything necessary;. OK. I do