Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Alexander Limi wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:11:11 -0700, Philipp von Weitershausen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*IF* you'd like to be pragmatic, I'd suggest we clean up those
failing Plone tests, merge the branch and be on our way.
This gets
Alexander Limi wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:11:11 -0700, Philipp von Weitershausen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*IF* you'd like to be pragmatic, I'd suggest we clean up those failing
Plone tests, merge the branch and be on our way.
I'm also happy to make it visible on the Plone agenda, as long
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Alexander Limi wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:11:11 -0700, Philipp von Weitershausen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*IF* you'd like to be pragmatic, I'd suggest we clean up those
failing Plone tests, merge the branch and be on our way.
This gets back to Hanno's suggestion
Malthe Borch wrote:
On Z2, certain imports need to come from Products.Five, to play nicely
with ZPublisher and friends.
Not really. You can inherit from zope.publisher.browser.BrowserView and
Five's browser:page / directive will magically slap
Acquisition.Explicit into a newly-created
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Technically, I think that this is going to be hard. You'd need to patch
in the magic acquisition base class. Acquisition is the main reason that
some of the code needed to be
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
*IF* you'd like to be pragmatic, I'd suggest we clean up those failing
Plone tests, merge the branch and be on our way.
+1
- C
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
On Apr 14, 2008, at 19:11 , Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
*IF* you'd like to be pragmatic, I'd suggest we clean up those
failing Plone tests, merge the branch and be on our way.
+1
jens
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
*IF* you'd like to be pragmatic, I'd suggest we clean up those failing
Plone tests, merge the branch and be on our way. Yes, we *might* be
plastering over a potential problem in the patch, but the other
tests didn't seem to be affected and intensive alpha
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:11:11 -0700, Philipp von Weitershausen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*IF* you'd like to be pragmatic, I'd suggest we clean up those failing
Plone tests, merge the branch and be on our way.
I'm also happy to make it visible on the Plone agenda, as long as it's
made clear
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Technically, I think that this is going to be hard. You'd need to patch
in the magic acquisition base class. Acquisition is the main reason that
some of the code needed to be duplicated - without the
Malthe Borch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Z2, certain imports need to come from Products.Five, to play nicely
with ZPublisher and friends.
I'd like to ask for the motivation for not patching it onto the
existing classes and/or modules. The effect of having Z2-developers
import from
Daniel Nouri wrote:
Therefore, I'd argue that we should, in contrary to what you suggest,
make the Zope 2 compatibility layer more explicit in the form of utility
functions, instead of more implicit. Because it makes things more
transparent and easier to debug.
You might be right; but it's a
Malthe Borch wrote:
On Z2, certain imports need to come from Products.Five, to play nicely
with ZPublisher and friends.
I'd like to ask for the motivation for not patching it onto the existing
classes and/or modules.
Technically, I think that this is going to be hard. You'd need to patch
Malthe Borch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel Nouri wrote:
Therefore, I'd argue that we should, in contrary to what you suggest,
make the Zope 2 compatibility layer more explicit in the form of utility
functions, instead of more implicit. Because it makes things more
transparent and easier
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Technically, I think that this is going to be hard. You'd need to patch
in the magic acquisition base class. Acquisition is the main reason that
some of the code needed to be duplicated - without the existence of
acquisition wrappers, security checks are not made for
Hi.
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Technically, I think that this is going to be hard. You'd need to
patch in the magic acquisition base class. Acquisition is the main
reason that some of the code needed to be duplicated - without the
existence of acquisition wrappers, security
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
[snip]
As the problems only showed themselves while doing browser testing
inside Plone, I guess I can at least write some unit tests for them, so
someone else can actually take a look at them more easily.
I'll see if I can do that during my next 10% day [1] :)
Yes,
17 matches
Mail list logo
