Am 06.07.2007 um 17:22 schrieb yuppie:
I can live with that approach, but would like to see CMF 2.1 adjusted:
'getToolByInterfaceName' is a completely misleading method name if
tools will not become utilities. This method has no 'context' (or
'REQUEST') argument, so it can't return tools.
Previously Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 06.07.2007 um 17:22 schrieb yuppie:
I can live with that approach, but would like to see CMF 2.1 adjusted:
'getToolByInterfaceName' is a completely misleading method name if
tools will not become utilities. This method has no 'context' (or
'REQUEST')
Previously Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6 Jul 2007, at 17:22, yuppie wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
This is not about making the implementation easier. This is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6 Jul 2007, at 17:22, yuppie wrote:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
This is not about making the implementation easier. This is
about defining what utilities are. If they
Previously yuppie wrote:
Hi!
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Or do you prefer to keep things as they are over a less clean switch
to utilities?
Yes. I'd rather get 2.1 out, even with tools-which-can't-be-utilitiies
Previously Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
yuppie wrote:
Hi Tres!
Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Or do you prefer to keep things as they are over a less clean switch to
utilities?
Yes. I'd rather get 2.1 out, even with
