--On Dienstag, 5. April 2005 22:29 Uhr +0200 Dieter Maurer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In our case, "listFilteredActionsFor" spends about 70 percent
of its complete time in the checking of "action in catlist".
I did some profiling last week because Limi complained also about
the slowness of the s
--On Dienstag, 5. April 2005 21:44 Uhr -0800 Alec Mitchell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
sure it all depends on the specific use case. Whatever the case, this
check is almost certainly unnecessary, whereas the condition checks are
unavoidable and difficult to optimize.
If the check should be nec
--On Montag, 25. April 2005 15:27 Uhr +0200 Florent Guillaume
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Speaking about Zope 2.8, can I close the outstanding issue about
CMF-1_4-branch not working on Zope 2.8?
I don't know, I've never used those two together (and I'm n
--On Mittwoch, 4. Mai 2005 20:58 Uhr +0200 Dieter Maurer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hm, the queries used for worklists are quite trivial.
In principle, they should be fast (at least if they would
not include the horribly inefficient "effective/expires" subquery
automatically added by the Catalog
--On 17. Juni 2005 10:26:31 +0200 Maya Angelova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi
I have a the following problem by restarting a plone site under zope.
Could anybody give me a hint.
would be very grateful
sh plone2 restart
plone2: line 156: plone2 : command not found
plone2: line 158: plone2
--On 1. August 2005 12:53:20 -0400 Geoff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 17:30:20 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
It would help everyone if the CMF side opened up a little
more to ideas coming down from Plone, and if the Plone side stopped
reinventing wheels that would be m
--On 21. Oktober 2005 19:27:38 -0400 Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
- Performance on the view version is nearly twice the "classic"
version (14.2 ms vs 24.2 ms on my box).
Any idea why the view version is such slow? I thought the execution of
trusted code should be faster :-
--On 9. November 2005 20:41:24 +0100 Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2005-11-9 16:17 +0100:
...
To make sure that CMF 1.5.5 will play well with Five 1.2, I have to
make sure that no method manage_afterAdd redoes a recursion that one
of its base classes wa
--On 3. Dezember 2005 12:54:37 -0500 George Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Right -- but the part that confuses me, is where do variables like
came_from, ACTUAL_URL, and VIRTUAL_URL get set? Which ones get used,
what items (Virtual Host Monster, Cookie Crumbler, etc.) fire in what
order? W
--On 4. Dezember 2005 20:13:52 -0800 Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 10:23:25 -0800, Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I have difficulties to understand the paragraph:
What have anchors to do with the query string?
As I understand it, "anchors" (frag
--On 6. Dezember 2005 11:43:18 -0800 Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 22:38:08 -0800, Andreas Jung
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thus, a link like will *reload the page*, then
go to the anchor - which is clearly not desirable behaviour.
Why can&
--On 6. Dezember 2005 22:41:40 -0800 Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Look, I'm just trying to make Zope a bit more friendly to new developers.
Of course, this seems to not be a priority. I'll stop bitching, but the
next time people complain about Plone "putting things in the wrong l
There is a good chance that the current ZPT implementation of Z2 will be
replaced with a wrapper implementation around the Z3 ZPT code (my current
implementation provides wrappers for ZopePageTemplate and PageTemplateFile
which works fine with a nacked Zope). After a deprecation period there is a
--On 18. Januar 2006 09:03:15 -0800 Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Note that I'm not saying it *won't* ship with 2.9, just that we reserve
the right to ship with 2.8, since the 2.9 status is still uncertain,
What is uncertain (except the issues with the Windows release)?
-aj
pg
--On 18. Januar 2006 09:30:37 -0800 Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 09:20:41 -0800, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
--On 18. Januar 2006 09:03:15 -0800 Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Note that I'm not saying it *won
--On 7. Februar 2006 11:34:30 + Rui Gamito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all.
Can anyone tell me why are there such differences on the reports generated
by webalizer when running against the apache logs or the Z2.log from
zope? I understand that this Z2.log is already in a format readable
--On 14. Februar 2006 10:20:24 +0100 Hans Schou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
A very new into Zope/CMF/Plone so it might be a silly question I have.
I have installed PloneMall. In that there is a tool which is called
portal_ordermanager. If I open that I can go to the Properties tab, and
in
Both solution appear a bit "heavy" to me. I solved this issue for
TextIndexNG3 by adding generic support for wrapped objects by introducing an
IObjectWrapper interface which is checked by the indexer. Using
five:implements it is easy to attach this interface - if necessary - to any
wrapper class
--On 7. April 2006 10:18:52 +0200 yuppie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Declaring interfaces correctly is never overkill.
Of course not..
And as I mentioned in
an earlier reply I already checked in a fix for this. In CMF 1.6.1 and
2.0 you will be able to adept to proxied interfaces.
In my p
--On 8. April 2006 11:17:39 +0200 yuppie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Skin method lookup uses __getattr__, so the more general question would
be attribute lookup.
The lookup order was changed recently (Zope 2.9.2) as described here:
http://codespeak.net/pipermail/z3-five/2006q1/001186.html
We
--On 8. April 2006 12:38:09 +0200 yuppie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The lookup order fix is also in Five 1.2.2 and higher, so upgrading from
Five 1.2.1 explains the changed behavior.
Waahh...it was _extremely_ convenient to override skin methods this way.
Is there any way to achieve that no
--On 9. April 2006 13:15:15 +0200 Philipp von Weitershausen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You are of course free to introduce adapters of your own, but I think
the second solution suggested is not too heavy and easily implemented.
After all, other code will also depend on the wrapper being as
tr
Hi,
I am giving an internal talk about the state of Zope & friends..The CMF 2.0
release notes mention "Pluggable TypeInformation objects" as new feature.
Can someone give a short explanation what this means?
Thanks,
Andreas
pgplE5cRSHazY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
--On 20. Oktober 2006 18:46:08 +0200 fabio gravina
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've add some memberdata in the portal_memberdata, and than i've modify
the
join_form to make possible the user insert this info.
But i'm not sure that this info is correctly stored because when i do:
i.e
user = p
--On 22. Oktober 2006 14:55:04 +0200 fabio gravina
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How I can retrieve all Folder's contents???
folder.contentValues()
-aj
pgpqQSlZHiksc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 1. Dezember 2006 13:59:00 +0100 Daniel de la Cuesta
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I want to ask you about indexes and searches:
>
> I am using CPS over CMF and I am working with a "KeywordIndex" that
> index a vocabulary.
>
> The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 4. Dezember 2006 10:20:05 +0100 Daniel de la Cuesta
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You told me:
>
>>> Subject = {'query' : (kw1,kw2), 'operator' : 'and'}
>
> That`s works fine. Thank you very much.
>
> Now something more dificult, what about
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 4. Dezember 2006 14:12:13 +0100 Daniel de la Cuesta
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One more thing,
>
> How can I set OR association between differents indexes.
>
> For example:
>
> query= { 'Subject' : kw1,
>'SearchableText': "
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 4. Dezember 2006 16:21:05 +0100 cristi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have a Zope+Plone web application and one of my forms aks the
> user for some information. Then this information is saved in the
> Zope database.
>
Huh? Wh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 4. Dezember 2006 16:53:35 +0100 cristi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I have a Zope+Plone web application and one of my forms aks the
>>> user for some information. Then this information is saved in the
>>> Zope datab
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You might have noticed that I have changed the ZopeTemplateFile
implementation to work with unicode as internal representation. I think it
would make sense for FSPageTemplate instance to use unicode as well -
especially when ZPTs and FSPageTemplate
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 19. Dezember 2006 09:34:13 +0100 Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On 18 Dec 2006, at 13:52, Andreas Jung wrote:
>> What has to be done:
>&g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 19. Dezember 2006 09:58:37 +0100 Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On 19 Dec 2006, at 09:45, Andreas Jung wrote:
>> Jup. However I am not comple
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 21. Dezember 2006 20:14:59 +0100 Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Andreas Jung wrote at 2006-12-20 19:34 +0100:
>> ...
>> Right. The pt_render() should return unicode only. Let's assume
>> F
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 29. Dezember 2006 10:56:50 -0500 Edmund Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Jens,
> Thanks for your generic answer. What details about my setup might help in
> figureing out how I could successfully update security without my server
> grindin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 29. Dezember 2006 11:17:27 -0500 Edmund Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Quoting Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>
>>
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On 20. Dezember 2006 19:34:22 +0100 Andreas Jung
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>>
>> If you look at the current FSPageTemplate code, there was already an
>> attempt to find and transfer enoding information with the r
--On 5. Januar 2007 21:22:24 +0100 Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 5 Jan 2007, at 20:51, Andreas Jung wrote:
I finished my work (including some test).
Any objections merging the changes back to the trunk?
If the tests pa
While working with a customer with GenericSetup the following question came
up:
Within the "Setup tools properties" screen you can choose the active
site configuration. The select box shows both site profiles and extension
profile. In our understanding a site profile replaces an existing
confi
--On 16. März 2007 11:38:44 -0400 Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Is this intentional?
We are actually working to fix that exact problem here at the BBQ
sprint. I will be checking in to this branch today (within the next
hour or so):
svn+ssh://svn.zope.org/GenericSetup/branches
--On 11. Juni 2007 17:37:26 +0200 Charlie Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi,
further to the discussion last month I'm about to provide a patch which
will support ReST for Document.py plus a revised document_edit_template.pt
39, in ?
from Products.PageTemplates.utils import encodi
--On 13. Juni 2007 16:53:56 +0200 Charlie Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Am 13.06.2007 um 16:44 schrieb Jens Vagelpohl:
The zope.structuredtext package is a Zope 3 package, so without
looking closely I would assume no patches would be needed for Zope
2.x, since it just uses the Zope 3 p
I get the following error when importing an extension profile of my own
product through the ZMI (portal_setup -> Profiles -> Extension Profiles ->
Click on my extension profile -> Click on "Import selected extensions").
Using the latest Plone 3.0 version from Subversion and GS 1.2beta (appears
--On 25. Juni 2007 13:07:18 +0200 Arnar Lundesgaard
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Den 25. jun. 2007 kl. 12.50 skrev Andreas Jung:
I get the following error when importing an extension profile of my
own product through the ZMI (portal_setup -> Profiles -> Extension
Profiles -&
Hi,
I have an extension profile that works with Plone 3.0 (basically modifying
portal_skins and portal_actions). For Plone 2.5 compatibility my
actions.xml and skins.xml need to be different because the XML structure is
different between. What is the best approach for maintaining XML files fo
--On 18. Juli 2007 19:08:00 + Maurits van Rees
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andreas Jung, on 2007-07-18:
I have an extension profile that works with Plone 3.0 (basically
modifying =
portal_skins and portal_actions). For Plone 2.5 compatibility my=20
actions.xml and skins.xml need
--On 25. Juli 2007 14:36:21 -0400 David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi all,
I'm using zope 2.7.8 and looking for a means generating a PDF
document. I've googled and looked around a bit but everything seems
rather dated (stuff from 2002). What are you all doing to deal with
this the
--On 13. August 2007 10:49:36 +0200 Hanno Schlichting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
A common user database between the Plone and CMF bug trackers is a
bigger benefit than the common user base between CMF and Zope I think.
But maybe our two communities still don't overlap enough for that idea
t
--On 12. September 2007 12:07:54 +0530 mrajasekhar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
def fun1(self):
REQUEST=self.REQUEST
fun2=self.veiws.fun3
return fun2(self,REQUEST=REQUEST)
what is the meaning of REQUEST=self.REQUEST
The REQUEST is always available as part of the "current"
--On 14. September 2007 15:21:28 -0400 "Doyon, Jean-Francois"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
So, I have this situation happen often enough, and I'm not sure what
would be the best way to approach it. The context is a Zope + CMF
(latest) framework deigned to host multiple sites, but wher
basically your decision.
Andreas
--On 13. August 2007 09:17:45 +0200 Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Jung is in the process of getting the regular Zope 2 issue
collector moved onto Launchpad. He said the Launchpad guys
--On 21. September 2007 18:11:33 +0200 Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 21 Sep 2007, at 17:44, Andreas Jung wrote:
We are currently working on the migration of the Zope 2 bugtracker.
Jim asked about the migration of t
--On 19. Oktober 2007 10:03:43 +0200 Joachim Schmitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi,
If one iterates over the result of a portal_catalog search, for each
brain there are about 8 datetime objects loaded (one for each dateindex),
which quickly fills the memory.
how can I access only the brain
Hi all,
while recataloging a Plone 3.0.1 site I encounter sometimes the following
error with _some_ ATDocument instances (while other ATDocument instances
indexing properly)...known bug?
Andreas
---
007-10-22 01:04:46 ERROR Zope.ZCatalog Recataloging object at
/fml-migrated/fml failed
--On 22. Oktober 2007 19:54:33 +0200 Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2007-10-22 08:07 +0200:
while recataloging a Plone 3.0.1 site I encounter sometimes the following
error with _some_ ATDocument instances (while other ATDocument instances
indexing pr
--On 25. Oktober 2007 12:40:28 +0200 Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Previously Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi guys,
Now that the Zope and Zope3 collectors have been migrated
successfully onto Launchpad, and there seems to be a good rout
--On 27. Oktober 2007 20:58:26 +0200 Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote at 2007-10-25 12:37 +0200:
...
I personally had one remaining issue, namely the fact that my main
browser (OmniWeb) could not display Launchpad at all due to a CSS bug
in OW itself.
I still
--On 30. Oktober 2007 14:46:44 +0100 Charlie Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Dear all,
a simple question with hopefully a simple answer! How do I access objects
from an object's context or hierarchy?
Acquisition? Traversal using restrictedTraverse()?
-aj
pgpXFZBCguPi5.pgp
Description:
Hi,
is there a buildout recipe that can unpack the CMF source archive properly?
The problem is basically that the top-level folder contains the products
as subdirectories. So the product dirs must be moved or linked.
Andreas
--
ZOPYX Ltd. & Co. KG - Charlottenstr. 37/1 - 72070 Tübingen - German
--On 13. Dezember 2007 20:06:01 +0100 "Damien Baty (ML)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
If I define a catalog index with GenericSetup, GS kindly removes the
index of the same name if it exists, and then add it again. This is
probably a good intention. However, when I reinstall
--On 10. Januar 2008 11:41:49 +0100 Charlie Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
A happy 2008 to everyone!
Currently it's not really possible to use ZSQL with CMF because
CMFDefault.utils.decode does not know how to handle
Shared.DC.ZRDB.Results.Results or Record.Record instances
I think that
--On 27. Februar 2008 21:59:58 + Maurits van Rees
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
greenman, on 2008-02-27:
So, for the catalog.xml importer, why can't the trigger for reindexing
an index be a flag on the catalog index declaration itself? Is it
really generic setups role to determine if chang
--On 28. Februar 2008 20:35:09 +0100 Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2008-2-28 07:13 +0100:
--On 27. Februar 2008 21:59:58 + Maurits van Rees
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
greenman, on 2008-02-27:
So, for the catalog.xml importer, why can&#
--On 29. Februar 2008 08:39:05 + Martin Aspeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Of course, we should also provide a way to get an interface or something
else describing the configuration for introspection purposes. Waiting one
or two Zope versions for that to get a non-purging GS import handle
--On 29. Februar 2008 13:09:01 +0100 Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
My personal opinion: I'd rather see the interface-based solution in a
few weeks or a couple months (the next Zope release) than the, umh,
less-than-professional solution that will stick around forever. As
such
--On 28. Februar 2008 09:38:31 +0100 yuppie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi!
Andreas Jung wrote:
How about the following idea:
- within the Zope core we define an _optional_ interface for indexes -
something like:
class IIndexConfiguration(Interface):
def getConfigu
--On 29. Februar 2008 14:07:57 +0100 Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Feb 29, 2008, at 13:17 , Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 29. Februar 2008 13:09:01 +0100 Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
My personal opinion: I'd rather see the interface-based
--On 29. Februar 2008 16:45:19 +0100 yuppie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 28. Februar 2008 09:38:31 +0100 yuppie
wrote:
I'd prefer a IConfigurableIndex interface that also has a set method.
I added the IIndexConfiguration to the Zope trunk. I don't
Hi there,
I am currently working on an extension profile for a Plone content-type
with two content-types. Right now I am in the situation where the
content-type isn't added to portal_types although the configuration
under types/MyType.xml and types.xml are obviously there and correct. I
am un
On 18.10.2008 10:16 Uhr, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 18, 2008, at 10:12 , Andreas Jung wrote:
Hi there,
I am currently working on an extension profile for a Plone content-
type with two content-types. Right now I am in the situation where
the
Hi there,
we are currently doing consultancy work for a bigger Zope-based CMS
project (lotes of users, lots of concurrent editors/write). Plone and
CMF are basically what we are looking into right now. It is well-known
that Plone is poor on concurrent write. It is basically impossible
creatin
On 22.11.2008 15:39 Uhr, Charlie Clark wrote:
Hi Andreas,
a very interesting situation. I've never thought of object creation
when choosing "pure" CMF over Plone as this is largely a ZODB issue.
As Roché points out it is less likely to be the transactions and more
likely to be the cataloguing
On 23.11.2008 9:17 Uhr, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2008-11-21 07:31 +0100:
... write performance ...
However the transaction size does not
seem to have any impact on the number of simulataneous writes.
Have you profiled an individual request to learn what the time is spent for
On 23.11.2008 11:57 Uhr, Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 23.11.2008 um 09:24 schrieb Andreas Jung:
This issue is independent of the client-side. ab2 and cmf/plone were
running on the same (fast) machine.
Is this really content that is suited for the ZODB?
I am talking of the standard content
So weit bei mir nichts dazwischen kommt könnte ich ab 13h.
Gruß,
Andreas
On 22.11.2008 15:39 Uhr, Charlie Clark wrote:
zop
Am 21.11.2008 um 07:31 schrieb Andreas Jung:
hmmso why is CMF here nearly as bad a Plone. In Plone we know
that everything is indexed various times (also in CMF I
ooopss - wrong list :-)
On 24.11.2008 10:42 Uhr, Andreas Jung wrote:
So weit bei mir nichts dazwischen kommt könnte ich ab 13h.
Gruß,
Andreas
On 22.11.2008 15:39 Uhr, Charlie Clark wrote:
zop
Am 21.11.2008 um 07:31 schrieb Andreas Jung:
hmmso why is CMF here nearly as bad a Plone. In
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 28.01.2009 15:33 Uhr, Charlie Clark wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there any reason why a portal_catalog.searchResults() returns an
> empty result set when called on the command line but not from within
> ZMI? It is the same catalog and I can items to it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 28.01.2009 15:52 Uhr, Charlie Clark wrote:
> Am 28.01.2009 um 15:44 schrieb Andreas Jung:
>
>> Command-line (zopectl debug?): you're anonymous
>> ZMI: you're authenticated
>>
>> The catalog adds additional f
attributes required for indexing.
>
> TextIndexNG3 does some deeper inspection on the object. It basically
> needs to bypass some of the things that are ordinarily intercepted by
> the wrapper. Andreas Jung will have to give more detail, but it feels
> prudent to me to have
We are currently migration from Zope 2.8/CMF 1.X to Zope 2.11/CMF 2.1.
I have a minimal base profile and two almost identical extension
profiles for
product A and B (both containing toolset.xml, skins.xml and
import_steps.xml).
The setup code is almost identical with the one from
CMFDefault.factor
Hi there,
I am currently migrating our CMS from CMF 1.X to CMF 2.1.
The following error is raised because the original content classes
are not derived from CMFCatalogAware.
# Module Products.HaufeCMS.DataLevel.Folder, line 170, in addDocument
# Module Products.BTreeFolder2.BTreeFolder2, line 4
On 29.06.09 08:43, David Glick wrote:
>
>
>
> From
> http://dev.plone.org/old/plone/browser/plone.app.discussion/trunk/plone/app/discussion/comment.py#L83
> and
> following lines it would appear you can do the latter.
Thanks - adding the related hooks returning () solves the problem. The
strange
82 matches
Mail list logo
