Hi,
I noticed 'zope.globalrequest' on the PyPI RSS feed today and wonder
about it. IMHO this implements an anti-pattern in an official way
without a warning that this needs to be handled with care.
Christian
--
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112
Christian Theune wrote:
I noticed 'zope.globalrequest' on the PyPI RSS feed today and wonder
about it. IMHO this implements an anti-pattern in an official way
without a warning that this needs to be handled with care.
The discussion for this happened on the plone-dev mailing list. The
On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 22:05 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Okay, I'll take another look then and look at ObjectRef. Ah, yes, Dan
pointed out to you that you are using a zope.schema.Field in a class
instead of in a schema (an interface). That isn't right, and since the
direct use of that
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Christian Theune wrote:
I noticed 'zope.globalrequest' on the PyPI RSS feed today and wonder
about it. IMHO this implements an anti-pattern in an official way
without a warning that this needs to be handled with care.
The discussion for this happened on the
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Thu Jan 15 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Fri Jan 16 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.7 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Jan 15 20:50:32 EST 2009
URL:
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Community in its entirety. Inventing a zope2 or z2c namespace is a poor
choice.
Why? That seems like the perfect namespace for this particular package...
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Hey,
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Tim Cook timothywayne.c...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 22:05 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Okay, I'll take another look then and look at ObjectRef. Ah, yes, Dan
pointed out to you that you are using a zope.schema.Field in a class
instead of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 16.01.2009 15:51 Uhr, Chris Withers wrote:
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Community in its entirety. Inventing a zope2 or z2c namespace is a poor
choice.
Why? That seems like the perfect namespace for this particular package...
Namespaces are
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 15:55 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
I don't think a wiki page with a chronicle is necessary or even
helpful; you need to give us the information necessary to find the
bug, but no distracting surrounding information.
Okay.
To debug this
problem, a developer will need
Tim Cook wrote:
I would also like for you to explain just what it is about my attitude
that you find so offensive/problematic?
As a general rule of thumb, anyone who posts with more than on
exlamation mark is likely on the wrong track.
Cross posting to several lists is also a bit of a
Andreas Jung wrote:
Namespaces are like dust and smoke. We already have enough (pointless)
namespaces. So let's stick with zope.* and z3c.* for Zope related packages.
Why note merge those two into one then?
Personally, I've always seen zope.* as being usable on their own or with
either Zope 2
Hey,
To debug this
problem, a developer will need the smallest possible example of code
that demonstrates the problem. That means, I take it, just 2 schemas
and a single form. Describe briefly what you expect to happen and what
in fact happens. If that example can be done *without*
Chris Withers wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Namespaces are like dust and smoke. We already have enough (pointless)
namespaces. So let's stick with zope.* and z3c.* for Zope related packages.
Why note merge those two into one then?
Merging namespaces just causes work without any benefit. A
Thanks for all the assistance.
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 18:05 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Yes, you do create new schema fields by subclassing from Field.
It's just that we saw you putting a field not in a schema but in what
looked like a concrete object.
This has given me a BIG pause while
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jan 16, 2009, at 18:25 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
The concept of
giving SVN repositories any kind of quality level aspect failed in the
same way. Dependencies are specified in the setup.py and egg metadata.
Quality is judged by who has
On Friday 16 January 2009, Andreas Jung wrote:
On 16.01.2009 15:51 Uhr, Chris Withers wrote:
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Community in its entirety. Inventing a zope2 or z2c namespace is a poor
choice.
Why? That seems like the perfect namespace for this particular package...
Namespaces
On Friday 16 January 2009, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Christian Theune wrote:
I noticed 'zope.globalrequest' on the PyPI RSS feed today and wonder
about it. IMHO this implements an anti-pattern in an official way
without a warning that this needs to be handled with care.
The discussion for
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Jan 16, 2009, at 18:25 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
The concept of
giving SVN repositories any kind of quality level aspect failed in the
same way. Dependencies are specified in the setup.py and egg metadata.
Quality is judged by who has written some code, number of
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Hanno Schlichting hanno...@hannosch.eu wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Even though there is no official dictator for each of those common
namespaces like zope, z3c, plone, archetypes, etc I do see value in at
least attempting to be careful when choosing the
Hi Tim,
Tim Cook schrieb:
Thanks for all the assistance.
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 18:05 +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Yes, you do create new schema fields by subclassing from Field.
It's just that we saw you putting a field not in a schema but in what
looked like a concrete object.
Hi Shane,
On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 14:10 -0700, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Sorry, but the patch doesn't make any sense. Your version of
_validate_fields quietly skips validation entirely by default.
First of all that is why I asked for others to look at it. :-)
But I DID test it by inserting an
Thanks All,
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 21:55 +0100, Carsten Senger wrote:
Sure you can have specialized fields that subclass from Field, TextLine,
or another base class. E.g. RegistrationNumber(TextLine) that takes care
to validate the input for a special format. But you use them in an
On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 13:00 -0200, Tim Cook wrote:
This issue is such a huge frustration for me that I am offering a bounty
of 100USD out of my personal pocket to the first person that solves the
issue, gets it committed to a published zope.schema egg and included in
the standard Grok
Hi Tim.
Unfortunately I didn't follow the discussion lately, so may be the
problem is no more, but...
I just committed a fix for zope.schema's ValidationError that makes
its repr output more sensible. I'd like community to review those
changes and say if they're okay, because changing exception
Dan Korostelev wrote:
I just committed a fix for zope.schema's ValidationError that makes
its repr output more sensible. I'd like community to review those
changes and say if they're okay, because changing exception formatting
syntax will affect doctest so they should be adapted to new style.
Stephan Richter wrote:
Then let's just mention its intended use in Zope 2/Plone in the documentation
and go on with life.
i've just added such a note and made a fresh release —
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.globalrequest/1.0a2
best regards,
andi
--
zeidler it consulting -
Christian Theune wrote:
I noticed 'zope.globalrequest' on the PyPI RSS feed today and wonder
about it. IMHO this implements an anti-pattern in an official way
without a warning that this needs to be handled with care.
First of all, I actually quite like this pattern. It's commonly used in
Benji York wrote:
And what about zope.agxassociation, zope.bforest, zope.bobo,
zope.generic, zope.ucol, zope.wfmc and zope.xmlpickle to name a few of
the more than 30 packages already in the zope.* namespace which are
neither part of any Zope release nor are likely to ever be?
Some of
Christian Theune wrote at 2009-1-16 09:06 +0100:
I noticed 'zope.globalrequest' on the PyPI RSS feed today and wonder
about it. IMHO this implements an anti-pattern in an official way
without a warning that this needs to be handled with care.
IMHO, it is not an anti-pattern:
We have a global
Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2009-1-16 10:14 +0100:
Christian Theune wrote:
I noticed 'zope.globalrequest' on the PyPI RSS feed today and wonder
about it. IMHO this implements an anti-pattern in an official way
without a warning that this needs to be handled with care.
The discussion for this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17.01.2009 8:39 Uhr, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2009-1-16 10:14 +0100:
Christian Theune wrote:
I noticed 'zope.globalrequest' on the PyPI RSS feed today and wonder
about it. IMHO this implements an anti-pattern in an
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-1-16 17:00 +:
...
Personally, I've always seen zope.* as being usable on their own or with
either Zope 2 or Zope 3. It seems this package is only usefully
targetted at zope2
I am not so sure.
Accessing the request in a simple standard way may be useful
whenever
32 matches
Mail list logo
