Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Sat Mar 22 12:00:00 2008 UTC to Sun Mar 23 12:00:00 2008 UTC.
There were 5 messages: 5 from Zope Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Sat Mar 22 21:51:54 EDT 2008
URL:
On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:54 PM, David Pratt wrote:
Hi Jim. OK great. Many thanks for elaborating. This will be
progressive. I had been considering an application use case without
a zodb. Is this the scenario that the basic publisher would
facilitate?
No-more so than the existing
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:54 PM, David Pratt wrote:
Hi Jim. OK great. Many thanks for elaborating. This will be
progressive. I had been considering an application use case without
a zodb. Is this the scenario that the basic publisher would
facilitate?
No-more so than the
On Mar 23, 2008, at 2:27 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:54 PM, David Pratt wrote:
Hi Jim. OK great. Many thanks for elaborating. This will be
progressive. I had been considering an application use case
without a zodb. Is this the scenario that the basic
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Mar 23, 2008, at 2:27 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:54 PM, David Pratt wrote:
Hi Jim. OK great. Many thanks for elaborating. This will be
progressive. I had been considering an application use case
without a zodb. Is this the
On Mar 23, 2008, at 3:02 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Mar 23, 2008, at 2:27 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:54 PM, David Pratt wrote:
Hi Jim. OK great. Many thanks for elaborating. This will be
progressive. I had been considering an
Working on this.
tehre are some things I will get back to you about, because what you
suggest breaks the unit test code...
Cheers,
Matthew
On Wed, 2008-03-19 at 23:32 +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
I'm starting a new thread, because the original one got hijacked by the
doctest/unittest
On Mar 23, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
No-more so than the existing publisher. I just want to make
the publisher useful for small applications that don't need
the component architecture and other facilities that
zope.publisher depends on for mostly minor reasons.
This is of
On Mar 21, 2008, at 3:35 PM, Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 21. März 2008 19:20:46 + Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
One thing that sucks right now for the repoze.zope2 story is that
Zope 2
isn't officially packaged in an egg-friendly form so the Repoze
guys
have to repackage
On Mar 21, 2008, at 8:59 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
but also includes a bunch of other packages. The OP might find the
following source distributions instructive:
- http://dist.repoze.org/zopelib-2.10.5.0.tar.gz contains the Zope2
packages plus the relevant Zope3 code, drawn from Zope 3.3.2.
10 matches
Mail list logo
