Hi all,
I am about to embark on integrating ZODB with CORBA, and am in the deep
thinking phase of the endeavor. ;-)
What I want to do is _explicitly_ manage connections and transactions
without being able to depend on what thread is running. I know that
this is _not_ the way that Zope works, b
"Phillip J. Eby" wrote:
> Thus, by setting the browser ID lifetime to at
> least as long as the longest session, one avoids having multiple cookies,
> one per session manager.
This is a good point and one that I probably didn't make clear in the
use cases.. it's entirely possible to have a site w
On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:23:52 +0200, Rik Hoekstra
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Karl Anderson wrote:
>>
>> Ken Manheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > > > I dont see this as a problem: You only create a new list when the
>> > > > traffic for that proposal gets too great for zope-dev. Threadi
DISCLAIMER: everything I'm about to say is my understanding based on my
discussions with Chris about how to do session management, and does not
necessarily reflect the current state of the session management code that
he is developing, or what will end up in the Zope core. :)
At 09:27 PM 9/30/00
Don't do man.
Quick everybody, let's start a rescue comittee!
Congrats Bill
Phil
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2000 6:40 PM
Subject: [Zope-dev] Membership and PTK
>
> I am ge
> I just read the CoreSessionTracking proposal.
Great...
> I am very concerned about the "long living browser id".
>
> * Why should a browser id live longer than the
> session data maintained for the browser?
Because it's a browser id, not a session id. This terminology may change in
lat
I just read the CoreSessionTracking proposal.
I am very concerned about the "long living browser id".
* Why should a browser id live longer than the
session data maintained for the browser?
This means, if the session lifetime is in the
order of an hour, the cookie need not live
This is hilarious. Way to prioritize, Bill! (and congratulations) :-)
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2000 1:40 PM
Subject: [Zope-PTK] Membership and PTK
>
> I am getting married
I am getting married Monday, and may be off lists for a week, so for
anyone who has done _any_ Membership/PTK Integration, PLEASE, send it to
me now, so I can work on it over the weekend, and next week.
I don't want to duplicate work already done.
Bill
--
E PLURIBUS LINUX
At 08:05 AM 9/30/00 -0500, Steve Spicklemire wrote:
>
>I'd hate to find out later that someone needs to go in and edit my Python
>code to make my framework useable But.. I think what I'm hearing is that
>working out the integration at the Rack level is much better than trying
>to delgate retri
Thanks again... it's great that you're willing to entertain
my apparantly twisted use of ZPatterns. ;-)
> "PJE" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
PJE> To put it another way: design your whitebox specialist how
PJE> you want it. Make it complete, but of course some parts
Kapil Thangavelu wrote:
> ZOPE_HOME/lib/python/Shared/DC/ZRDB/TM.py
>
> Glancing over the Transaction TM mixin class... i noticed a line
> commit=tpc_abort=tpc_begin
>
> i can understand tpc_begin=commit, but the abort seems strange.
> if an abort happens in the two phase commit the equality d
12 matches
Mail list logo