Am 05.10.2011, 15:26 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
> Strange! Your container implements IAttributeAnnotatable and
> AttributeAnnotations is registered correctly?
Yes, I was working with objects that provided things explicitly.
> Are you trying to use zope.annotation.factory? Last time I checked that
> d
Charlie Clark wrote:
> Am 04.10.2011, 10:55 Uhr, schrieb yuppie:
>>> Regarding zope.annotation - IAttributeAnnotatable creates a new object
>>> within the folder
>> Why do you think so? AFAICS the default implementation stores all
>> annotations in the __annotations__ attribute.
>
> Running some te
Am 04.10.2011, 10:55 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
> I think in general it's fine to use zope.schema for CMFCore interfaces.
> But if you use properties instead of separate accessors and mutators,
> you can't set different read/write permissions in Zope 2. So please make
> sure modifying the settings is p
Hi Charlie!
Charlie Clark wrote:
> Am 30.09.2011, 10:55 Uhr, schrieb yuppie:
>
>>
>> AFAICS only the getUpdateBase method of ISyndicationTool needs to be
>> backwards compatible. Everything else is new API or doesn't return
>> DateTime objects. Wouldn't it be better to use datetime internally? Yo
Am 30.09.2011, 22:29 Uhr, schrieb Tres Seaver :
>
> You want 'container.ZopeFind' or 'container.ZopeFindAndApply'.
Thanks Tres!
Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Helmholtzstr. 20
Düsseldorf
D- 40215
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-62
Am 30.09.2011, 10:55 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
>
> AFAICS only the getUpdateBase method of ISyndicationTool needs to be
> backwards compatible. Everything else is new API or doesn't return
> DateTime objects. Wouldn't it be better to use datetime internally? You
> already need an upgrade step for Synd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/30/2011 02:32 PM, Charlie Clark wrote:
> Hiya yuppie,
>
> Am 30.09.2011, 10:55 Uhr, schrieb yuppie
> :
>
>> If you want to modernize SyndicationInformation, why do you still
>> store DateTime objects in the database? (And why don't you use
>>
Hiya yuppie,
Am 30.09.2011, 10:55 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
> If you want to modernize SyndicationInformation, why do you still store
> DateTime objects in the database? (And why don't you use
> zope.annotation?)
I think that when I started this I was initially trying to update the
syndication s
Hi Charlie!
Charlie Clark wrote:
> I've hit a bit of a problem with folder syndication - I already have an
> annotations adapter for storing the values on the folder and I can extend
> this to be able to handle individual values rather than a dictionary but
> ProxyFieldProperties don't work becau
Am 29.09.2011, 14:14 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
> Yes.
I've hit a bit of a problem with folder syndication - I already have an
annotations adapter for storing the values on the folder and I can extend
this to be able to handle individual values rather than a dictionary but
ProxyFieldProperties d
Charlie Clark wrote:
> SettingsEditFormBase landed after my sturm and drang work last year. So
> you generally replace my explicit calls to tools with getContent? I guess
> I just need some proxyFields for enabling and disabling.
Yes.
> I still need to set view.adapters = {} for some reason but t
Hi Yuppie,
thanks as ever for the helpful explanation.
Am 29.09.2011, 10:39 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
> SettingsEditFormBase has a getContent() method similar to that in
> z3c.form. This allows a clean distinction between 'content' and
> 'context'. For content objects they are usually the same, but
Hi Charlie!
Charlie Clark wrote:
> Am 27.01.2011, 17:05 Uhr, schrieb yuppie:
>
>> zope.formlib is not made for DateTime values and encoded strings. So you
>> *always* have to make sure these values are converted correctly. And it
>> is hard to do that inside the form code. Obviously you did have
Am 27.01.2011, 17:05 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
> zope.formlib is not made for DateTime values and encoded strings. So you
> *always* have to make sure these values are converted correctly. And it
> is hard to do that inside the form code. Obviously you did have trouble
> to get it right that way. Afte
Hi Charlie!
Charlie Clark wrote:
> Am 26.01.2011, 16:50 Uhr, schrieb yuppie:
>
>> I'm not happy with the current state of CMF trunk. Especially the
>> syndication related changes cause trouble in different ways:
>> - SyndicationInformation was replaced by SyndicationInfo without
>> providing migr
Am 26.01.2011, 16:50 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
> I'm not happy with the current state of CMF trunk. Especially the
> syndication related changes cause trouble in different ways:
> - SyndicationInformation was replaced by SyndicationInfo without
> providing migration code. Local syndication settings ge
16 matches
Mail list logo