[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Maurits van Rees
Raphael Ritz, on 2008-05-29: Not sure whether that's following best practice but here is how paster/zopeskel generate this at the moment (this is taken from a custom add-on I'm currently working on): [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/dev/paster/incf.applications/trunk$ ls docs incf

[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Raphael Ritz
Jens Vagelpohl wrote: Hi Jens, Just wondering: Now that we are splitting the CMF down into its constituent packages and people don't need to get the old-fashioned tarball, do we need to have a copy of the LICENSE.txt file in every package? I'd think so, yes. And if yes, where would it

[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Maurits van Rees wrote: Raphael Ritz, on 2008-05-29: Not sure whether that's following best practice but here is how paster/zopeskel generate this at the moment (this is taken from a custom add-on I'm currently working on): [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/dev/paster/incf.applications/trunk$ ls docs incf

[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Maurits van Rees
Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: But personally I like having it inside the main folder, so in your example above it would be incf.applications/incf/applications/HISTORY.txt There's some benefit to that because it'll be part of the egg. You

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: But personally I like having it inside the main folder, so in your example above it would be incf.applications/incf/applications/HISTORY.txt There's some benefit to that

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
On 29 May 2008, at 11:27 , Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: But personally I like having it inside the main folder, so in your example above it would be incf.applications/incf/applications/HISTORY.txt There's some benefit to that because it'll be part of the

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: But personally I like having it inside the main folder, so in your example above it would be incf.applications/incf/applications/HISTORY.txt There's some benefit to that because it'll be part of the egg. You probably want to use a MANIFEST.in

[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Maurits van Rees
Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: But personally I like having it inside the main folder, so in your example above it would be incf.applications/incf/applications/HISTORY.txt

[Zope-CMF] CMF Tests: 9 OK

2008-05-29 Thread CMF Tests Summarizer
Summary of messages to the cmf-tests list. Period Wed May 28 11:00:00 2008 UTC to Thu May 29 11:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 9 messages: 9 from CMF Tests. Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : CMF-1.6 Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: CMF Tests Date: Wed May 28 21:39:10 EDT 2008 URL:

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: But personally I like having it inside the main folder, so in your example above it would be

[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Maurits van Rees
Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: But personally I like having it inside the main folder, so in your

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On May 29, 2008, at 04:19 , Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: [1] http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/maintaining-software.txt Ah, good resource, thanks for pointing that out. Thanks to everyone for the input. I'll go with putting the license file right with the

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: But personally I like having it

[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Maurits van Rees
Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: I'm not sure what you mean. The basic algorihm is: - MANIFEST is used to determine what is installed, or - subversion workingcopy information is used to determine what is installed, or - a default ruleset is used This algorithm is used at the moment a

[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Maurits van Rees
Jens Vagelpohl, on 2008-05-29: On May 29, 2008, at 04:19 , Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: [1] http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/maintaining-software.txt Ah, good resource, thanks for pointing that out. Thanks to everyone for the input. I'll go with putting the

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Jens Vagelpohl, on 2008-05-29: On May 29, 2008, at 04:19 , Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: [1] http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/maintaining-software.txt Ah, good resource, thanks for pointing that out. Thanks to

Re: [Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On May 29, 2008, at 08:34 , Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Suits me fine. Anyone in favour of updating the ZopeSkel templates to fit that pattern? (Sorry, bit out of topic here on the cmf list as there are no cmf skeletons there. Care to add one? :-)) -1 I

[Zope-CMF] Re: License file question

2008-05-29 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously Maurits van Rees wrote: Wichert Akkerman, on 2008-05-29: Previously

[Zope-CMF] cmfuid and zope.app.intids

2008-05-29 Thread Miles
Hi, I was wondering if the CMFUid package could be replaced by a thin wrapper around zope.app.intids. As (I think) one of the few users of CMFUid, I'd like to replace it within something a little more robust and this seemed like a possible way to do it. Generally, I've found having the

Re: [Zope-CMF] cmfuid and zope.app.intids

2008-05-29 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On May 29, 2008, at 15:10 , Miles wrote: - Has anyone used zope.app.intids at all, or done anything similar? No to both - Does this sound achievable at all? I'd think so. - Is this a generally useful thing to do? From the standpoint of trying to prevent reinventing wheels all over

[Zope-CMF] Re: cmfuid and zope.app.intids

2008-05-29 Thread Miles
Hi, snip From the standpoint of trying to prevent reinventing wheels all over the place it sounds like a good idea to re-use a Zope 3 component. However, beware of backwards-compatibility in terms of software and in terms of persistent data generated by the existing version. Like Tres

[Zope-CMF] Re: cmfuid and zope.app.intids

2008-05-29 Thread Martin Aspeli
Miles wrote: Hi, I was wondering if the CMFUid package could be replaced by a thin wrapper around zope.app.intids. As (I think) one of the few users of CMFUid, I'd like to replace it within something a little more robust and this seemed like a possible way to do it. Generally, I've found