I have lodged a collector issue on this
Rgds
Tim
On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 04:31, Nils Kassube wrote:
> Casey Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The server returns a 200 response status. Strangly, the response
> > headers do include WWW-Authenticate. So, the xml-rpc code must be
> > changin
Hello,
This may be something that cannot easily be fixed, but the permission "FTP
Access" is required for a user to have "WebDAV Access" to an object. Since
the method is shared by FTP and WebDAV a more general permission name
should be used.
Thanks,
-Brian
Casey Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The server returns a 200 response status. Strangly, the response
> headers do include WWW-Authenticate. So, the xml-rpc code must be
> changing the response status.
Yes. It's probably this piece in ZPublisher/xmlrpc.py:
--cut--
# Do the damage.
self.s
I can also define any foldmarks I wish in Jed. What do you suggest ?
I actually didn't care until this mail ;-)
--On Donnerstag, August 15, 2002 16:21:15 +0200 Jean Jordaan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > # {{{ ... #}}} crutches ;^)
> >
> > I use a folding editor (jed) and these are the fo
> I guess the main complaint was that given a set of indexes sharing a
> lexicon, deleting the lexicon and replacing it with another one had
> no effect on the indexes and in fact removes your ability to manage
> their lexicon at all. So you must replace all of the indexes to use
> the new lexicon
> > # {{{ ... #}}} crutches ;^)
>
> I use a folding editor (jed) and these are the folding marks.
Use Vim, it folds based on indentation (or anything else you care to
teach it)! ;>
--
Jean Jordaan
Upfront Systems http://www.upfrontsystems.co.za
___
> I think that there is at least potential value in sharing lexicons.
> Of course, a down side is that it complicates set up.
This is where I say "YAGNI" and announce that I'll be happy to
refactor the code if and when a real need is discovered.
> On the subject of referencing lexicons by path r
Casey Duncan wrote:
> On Thursday 15 August 2002 09:21 am, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
...
> I'm not sure what you mean. The pipelining is defined and executed in the
> lexicon.
My mistake.
>
>>I think that there is at least potential value in sharing lexicons.
>>Of course, a down side is that it
From: "Dieter Maurer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Matt Behrens writes:
> > Zope Bug Day August 2002 was an unqualified success, with our largest
> > bug total squashed to date: 45! The number of still-open collector
> > issues dropped by almost 25%. Thanks to all those who participated!
> > ...
>
On Thursday 15 August 2002 09:21 am, Jim Fulton wrote:
> The original reason to share vocabularies was that multiple fields
> often came from the same human "vocabulaties". The idea was that
vocabularies
> would encompass a number of features including:
>
> - Words (or n-grams) used
>
> - Synon
The original reason to share vocabularies was that multiple fields
often came from the same human "vocabulaties". The idea was that vocabularies
would encompass a number of features including:
- Words (or n-grams) used
- Synonyms
- Stemming rules
- Stop words
- Splitting rules
There was, po
At 10:54 2002-08-15 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
>Johan Carlsson [Torped] wrote:
>>I'm trying to setup to run with either TextPad, which can run external
>>program like python scripts
>>and then parse the result and making Traceback lines linked to the
>>line/file where the error occurred.
>
>No
Johan Carlsson [Torped] wrote:
>
> I'm trying to setup to run with either TextPad, which can run external
> program like python scripts
> and then parse the result and making Traceback lines linked to the
> line/file where the error occurred.
No sure exactly what you're trying to do here, can
Casey Duncan wrote:
> Anyone care to weigh in with use cases for shared lexicons?
Well, the use case you describe: several indexes with roughly the same lexicon
is the one to watch out for. If you're going to do some quantitative tests on
this, it'd be interesting.
Still, KISS and all that wo
Matt Behrens writes:
> Zope Bug Day August 2002 was an unqualified success, with our largest
> bug total squashed to date: 45! The number of still-open collector
> issues dropped by almost 25%. Thanks to all those who participated!
> ...
I want to note that I am *very* pleased with recent
>At 23:38 2002-08-14 -0400, Casey Duncan said:
>>The Item class mixes in Traversable, which is probably responsible for
>>making
>>this work TTW. It also gives you a bunch of other stuff that many Zope
>>classes need, like DAV support, copy support, ZMI tab support and security.
>>It doen't mix-
16 matches
Mail list logo
