Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
[snip]
The real goal behind all this is to make the security machinery in Zope
2 understand the ILocation API so that you won't *have to* rely on
Acquisition (but instead can use ILocation). Of course, you would still
be able to use Acquisition.
Yes, that would
Martin Aspeli wrote:
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:42:34 +0100, whit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
to echo Martijn, I've learned much more about zope3 thumbing through
the z3 bundled with Zope 2 than I have looking at actual zope3 source,
because I don't have a job that pays me to do pure zope3.
I
Paul Winkler wrote:
Using an Item or Folder as your root object for tests works fine except for
this one issue, so why not allow that?
My feeling is that setting up an app is unnecessary work when you
don't need one; for one thing, your test module needs to call
Zope2.startup() first; for
On 4/7/06, Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's why I didn't say *replacement* but *alternative*.
Jim is actively in favor of making acquisition wrappers support the Z3
location framework (i.e., expose '__parent__' and '__name__'), which
would be neither. ;)
Or both. :)
--
Lennart
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 06:04:11PM -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
+1 for getting rid of *anything* in Testing which does something as
Utterly Evil (tm) as scribbling on 'os.environ'.
Any tests which break on that account should be fixed, not covered over.
You don't risk breaking production code,
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 10:04:36AM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote:
I may try eradicating os.environ usage from Testing on my trunk
sandbox and see what else breaks...
Answer: nothing. Committed on the trunk.
I did a bit of grepping around too. There are a few tests
that twiddle os.environ, but
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:52:29PM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote:
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 10:04:36AM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote:
I may try eradicating os.environ usage from Testing on my trunk
sandbox and see what else breaks...
Answer: nothing. Committed on the trunk.
To clarify, I just
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 02:35:57PM +0200, Florent Guillaume wrote:
Paul Winkler wrote:
Using an Item or Folder as your root object for tests works fine except for
this one issue, so why not allow that?
My feeling is that setting up an app is unnecessary work when you
don't need one; for one
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 06:01:30PM -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
Paul Winkler wrote:
I know who originally added those tests,
That would be me.
I was hoping you'd pop in :-)
I don't see anything wrong with using a non-Zope2-app
object for unit testing: in fact, I think it is *superior*
Running CMF 2.0-beta tests against the zope 2 trunk, I noticed a test failure
that's not happening under zope 2.9:
Error in test testHTML
(Products.CMFDefault.tests.test_Document.DocumentFTPGetTests)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /usr/lib/python2.4/unittest.py, line 260, in run
--On 7. April 2006 15:37:38 -0400 Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is because the semantics of ZopePageTemplate(id, text=None) have
changed. It used to be that if text was None, the contents of
www/default.html would be used. That no longer happends, and pt_edit
can't accept None
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:50:06PM +0200, Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 7. April 2006 15:37:38 -0400 Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is because the semantics of ZopePageTemplate(id, text=None) have
changed. It used to be that if text was None, the contents of
www/default.html would
12 matches
Mail list logo
