Hey,
Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote:
I'm about to work a bit on z3c.schema2json [1]. As has been briefly
discussed before (a while ago [2]), z3c. schema2json is so similar to
z3c.schema2xml [3] in what it does and how it does it, that I wonder
about merging the two packages somehow.
One way
Thomas Lotze wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Thomas Lotze wrote:
[snip]
What about a simple and consistent API for all components including
utilities, adapters and multiadapters:
IFoo()
IFoo(x)
IFoo(x, y)
The last one won't work if we want to maintain backwards compatibility.
The
Wolfgang Schnerring wrote:
* On Nov 25, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Thomas Lotze wrote:
What about a simple and consistent API for all components including
utilities, adapters and multiadapters:
IFoo()
IFoo(x)
IFoo(x, y)
I quite like the simplicity of this spelling, so I want to be sure
*why* it
On 2009-11-26 08:43, Michael Howitz wrote:
Am 25.11.2009 um 15:49 schrieb Chris Withers:
[...]
Yes, PyPI is broken if you're an admin of many packages, feel free to
me too on this issue:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=2793544group_id=66150atid=513503
It's fixed since
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Thomas Lotze wrote:
You didn't explicitly mention the subject of backwards compatibility in
your original message, so let's make it explicit now: Is backwards
compatibility a goal in this discussion?
True. It's indeed a goal, as I'd like to be able to use this sooner
Martijn Faassen wrote:
But someone needs to think of a feasible upgrade scenario. We could
instrument all calls to IFoo and see whether a default argument is in
use, but what then? I'd be hard to distinguish a default argument from
one we're meant to adapt. I'd also be non-trivial to scan
Am Mittwoch 25 November 2009 13:07:58 schrieb Benji York:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Hermann Himmelbauer du...@qwer.tk wrote:
Ah, thanks that could be. My current version is zope.security-3.4.1 (as
from KGS-3.4.0).
The real bad thing about this is that it seems I'm stuck with that
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Wed Nov 25 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Thu Nov 26 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Wed Nov 25 20:38:30 EST 2009
URL:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Matthew Wilkes
matt...@matthewwilkes.co.uk wrote:
On 2009-11-25, at 1601, Benji York wrote:
I'm not sure I like the following suggestion better than the above, but
throwing it out there anyway:
Multiadapter:
IFoo((x,y))
I know it's probably a spurious
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net wrote:
That's not a fix, it just replaced one problem with another one: it is
now impossible to get your full list of packages.
Indeed.
Once SourceForge is allowing logins again I suggest we discuss this
there.
I'll be
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 14:34, Benji York be...@zope.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Matthew Wilkes
matt...@matthewwilkes.co.uk wrote:
On 2009-11-25, at 1601, Benji York wrote:
I'm not sure I like the following suggestion better than the above, but
throwing it out there anyway:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Hermann Himmelbauer du...@qwer.tk wrote:
If this bug did indeed exist in 3.4.1, we can backport the fix and do a
3.4.x bug-fix release.
Thanks a lot for help, that would really great. The question is, how do I find
out (with my limited knowledge of
2009/11/26 Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com:
Hey,
Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote:
I'm about to work a bit on z3c.schema2json [1]. As has been briefly
discussed before (a while ago [2]), z3c. schema2json is so similar to
z3c.schema2xml [3] in what it does and how it does it, that I wonder
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Leonardo Rochael Almeida
leoroch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 14:34, Benji York be...@zope.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Matthew Wilkes
I know it's probably a spurious use case, but what if I want to adapt a
tuple?
There could be
Shane Hathaway wrote:
[I talk about backwards compatibility issues with some proposed API changes,
but this modification doesn't have this issue]
Here is an interface decorator I intend to try out soon. It adds
convenient component lookup methods to a particular interface without
requiring
Thomas Lotze wrote:
[snip]
Then let me suggest not changing the call signature of an interface at all
but only add one or a few new methods. Firstly, this will keep backwards
compatibility even with code that adapts a tuple, and secondly, it allows
us to implement a simple and consistent API
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Thomas Lotze wrote:
[snip]
Then let me suggest not changing the call signature of an interface at all
but only add one or a few new methods. Firstly, this will keep backwards
compatibility even with code that adapts a tuple, and secondly, it
allows us to implement a
Hi,
On 11/25/2009 02:35 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
I think it makes sense. If we can relax the utility name must be a string
restriction it would be the best solution I think.
I'll see what I can do.
I've decided to keep the components subclass which inherits from
On 11/25/2009 08:51 PM, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
* 2009-11-25 19:35, Tres Seaver wrote:
IFoo()
IFoo(x)
IFoo(x, y)
You can't use an arbitrary number of positional arguments for the
contexts, because we need to support the named / default cases too.
I'm probably saying something very
On 11/26/2009 10:48 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Thomas Lotze wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Thomas Lotze wrote:
[snip]
What about a simple and consistent API for all components including
utilities, adapters and multiadapters:
IFoo()
IFoo(x)
IFoo(x, y)
I like the interface being called to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christian Theune wrote:
On 11/25/2009 08:51 PM, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
* 2009-11-25 19:35, Tres Seaver wrote:
IFoo()
IFoo(x)
IFoo(x, y)
You can't use an arbitrary number of positional arguments for the
contexts, because we need to support
21 matches
Mail list logo
