Hello Malthe,
Tiny problem is that the doctests seem to have the attributes in
lxml-sane order. That means just by removing lxml output-sanitization
even zpt output does not match the doctest.
Also, lxml is used to do some xpath queries.
Saturday, May 23, 2009, 10:23:16 AM, you wrote:
MB
Hello Malthe,
The problem that I see here with lxml is that it is used for output
checking. Even worse z3c.form requires at least 2.1.1 of lxml, where KGS
3.4 has lxml nailed at 1.3.6.
This burpes already on buildout.
Now even if I would ignore this requirement for testing, (and testing)
how
2009/5/23 Adam GROSZER agros...@gmail.com:
The problem that I see here with lxml is that it is used for output
checking. Even worse z3c.form requires at least 2.1.1 of lxml, where KGS
3.4 has lxml nailed at 1.3.6.
It might be possible to shed this testing dependency; ``lxml`` is used
because
2009/5/21 David Glick davidgl...@onenw.org:
Won't this cause problems if a z3c.form uses a template which calls a macro
from a traditional Zope page template? That is, make it impossible to use
z3c.form in a site that isn't using z3c.pt for everything?
That was the reason for z3c.ptcompat; it
On May 21, 2009, at 11:09 PM, Malthe Borch wrote:
2009/5/21 David Glick davidgl...@onenw.org:
Won't this cause problems if a z3c.form uses a template which calls
a macro
from a traditional Zope page template? That is, make it impossible
to use
z3c.form in a site that isn't using
Hello Malthe,
Well, the strong target is to make z3c.form 2.0 compatible with
KGS 3.4. (z3c.pt is somehow intertwined with z3c.ptcompat too.)
That's the goal am chasing though I'm quite busy right now.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009, 9:28:33 AM, you wrote:
MB Hello Adam, ––
MB The z3c.pt package
2009/5/21 Adam GROSZER agros...@gmail.com:
Well, the strong target is to make z3c.form 2.0 compatible with
KGS 3.4. (z3c.pt is somehow intertwined with z3c.ptcompat too.)
That's the goal am chasing though I'm quite busy right now.
I don't know the implications of requiring zope.i18n = 3.5, but
On May 21, 2009, at 1:10 AM, Malthe Borch wrote:
I think at this point that z3c.form could have a strong dependency on
z3c.pt. Complete list of extra packages:
Won't this cause problems if a z3c.form uses a template which calls a
macro from a traditional Zope page template? That is, make it
Hello Adam, ––
The z3c.pt package shouldn't have difficult dependencies; it depends
on zope.i18n = 3.5 but reasons unknown to me (Hanno CC'ed).
Note that the package no longer depends on ``lxml``.
\malthe
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
Hi.
Malthe Borch wrote:
The z3c.pt package shouldn't have difficult dependencies; it depends
on zope.i18n = 3.5 but reasons unknown to me (Hanno CC'ed).
The zope.i18n 3.5 dependency is used for the optimized i18n support in
Chameleon. I ported all the performance tweaks we made in Plone and
Hello Michael,
I'm trying to make z3c.pt optional at
svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/z3c.form/branches/adamg-z3c-pt-optional
because it just pulls in too many packages from the trunk that makes
it impossible to make a sort of compatibility layer for KGS 3.4.
Where being unable to use z3c.form with
Hi,
what is still to be done for the z3c.form 2.0 release?
Something I can help?
Yours sincerely,
--
Michael Howitz · m...@gocept.com · software developer
gocept gmbh co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 8 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Laurent Mignon wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Anybody still using Zope 2.11.x should probably just stck with the
versions of z3c.form which were known to work with that Zope2 version,
knowing that they will be able to upgrade z3c.form at the same time
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Wolfgang Schnerring wrote:
I'd like to introduce this to z3c.form as well (see attached patch). Would
it be alright with you for me to commit this to trunk (to then go into the
release)?
Add a test and you can check it in. :-)
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
2009/2/11 Stephan Richter srich...@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Wolfgang Schnerring wrote:
I'd like to introduce this to z3c.form as well (see attached patch). Would
it be alright with you for me to commit this to trunk (to then go into the
release)?
Add a test and you
2009/2/10 Stephan Richter srich...@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
Thanks for getting our attention on this. I consider this
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Wednesday 11 February 2009, Dan Korostelev wrote:
Thanks for getting our attention on this. I consider this a show-stopper
for 2.0. Dan, let's think about something creative that allows us to use
the new and old way, maybe through a special import statement like that:
2009/2/11 Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com:
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Wednesday 11 February 2009, Dan Korostelev wrote:
Thanks for getting our attention on this. I consider this a show-stopper
for 2.0. Dan, let's think about something creative that allows us to use
the new and old
Hello,
Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 2:19:48 AM, you wrote:
ObjectWidget/ObjectMultiWidget - ??? I didn't checked that out, so it
would be nice if its author reviewied it and wrote here about its
status.
SR Adam? I'll note that we use that code heavily at Keas, so at least for that
SR limited
2009/2/11 Stephan Richter srich...@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu:
On Wednesday 11 February 2009, Dan Korostelev wrote:
Yeah. So one solution, as I said before is to release zope.sitecompat
egg that provides a zope.site module, but doesn't implement a site
implementation, but instead imports things from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Korostelev wrote:
2009/2/10 Stephan Richter srich...@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 /
Hello,
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Wolfgang Schnerring wrote:
I'd like to introduce this to z3c.form as well (see attached patch). Would
it be alright with you for me to commit this to trunk (to then go into the
release)?
* Stephan Richter srich...@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu [2009-02-11 03:19]:
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Korostelev wrote:
2009/2/10 Stephan Richter srich...@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use
Hi,
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
In fact, zope.site require zope.container requiring ZODB3 :-(
I can't find any solutions to solve this problem. It is really damage to
lose the possibility of
Laurent Mignon wrote:
Hi,
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
In fact, zope.site require zope.container requiring ZODB3 :-(
Why can't you put these eggs into your Plone buildout? Are there version
Laurent Mignon wrote:
Hi,
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
In fact, zope.site require zope.container requiring ZODB3 :-(
I can't find any solutions to solve this problem. It is really damage
Martin Aspeli wrote:
Laurent Mignon wrote:
Hi,
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
In fact, zope.site require zope.container requiring ZODB3 :-(
Why can't you put these eggs into your Plone
2009/2/10 Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com:
The problem encountered is that zope.container specify ZODB3 as a main
dependency. After checking the code, it seems that ZODB is only required
for tests. If I modify zope.container.setup.py to specify ZODB3 as an
extra dependency for
Dan Korostelev wrote:
2009/2/10 Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com:
The problem encountered is that zope.container specify ZODB3 as a main
dependency. After checking the code, it seems that ZODB is only required
for tests. If I modify zope.container.setup.py to specify ZODB3 as an
2009/2/10 Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com:
Dan Korostelev wrote:
2009/2/10 Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com:
The problem encountered is that zope.container specify ZODB3 as a main
dependency. After checking the code, it seems that ZODB is only required
for tests. If I
Dan Korostelev wrote:
2009/2/10 Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com:
Dan Korostelev wrote:
2009/2/10 Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com:
The problem encountered is that zope.container specify ZODB3 as a main
dependency. After checking the code, it seems that ZODB is only
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
Thanks for getting our attention on this. I consider this a show-stopper for
2.0. Dan, let's think about something
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
BUT I wonder if the way that z3c.form compute resource url stay
compatible with zope2
from zope.site import hooks
class ImageButtonAction(image.ImageWidget, ButtonAction):
zope.component.adapts(interfaces.IFormLayer,
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
Thanks for getting our attention on this. I consider this a show-stopper for
2.0. Dan,
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
BUT I wonder if the way that z3c.form compute resource url stay
compatible with zope2
from zope.site import hooks
class ImageButtonAction(image.ImageWidget, ButtonAction):
Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com writes:
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
Thanks for getting our attention on
Daniel Nouri wrote:
Laurent Mignon laurent.mig...@softwareag.com writes:
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Laurent Mignon wrote:
With the replacement of zope.app.component import with zope.site, it's
no more possible to use z3c.form with Zope2 / Plone :-(
Thanks for
So here's a little review on current status of z3c.form. Mostly based
on items from CHANGES.txt for 2.0 release :) I may forget something,
so I'll reply to myself if something suddenly comes in my mind. And
sorry for my English, i'm quite in hurry now. :-)
FileWidget - It doesn't clear the bytes
On Monday 09 February 2009, Dan Korostelev wrote:
FileWidget - It doesn't clear the bytes value if no new file is
uploaded now, which is nice. But there's also should be a way to clear
current value if the field is not required. I've added that to the
TODOS.txt. I think that should be done
2009/2/10 Stephan Richter srich...@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu:
On Monday 09 February 2009, Dan Korostelev wrote:
FileWidget - It doesn't clear the bytes value if no new file is
uploaded now, which is nice. But there's also should be a way to clear
current value if the field is not required. I've
Am 09.12.2008 um 12:15 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
[...]
Should I do that tomorrow? And adjust all related packages
like zope.app.form, z3c.form etc. Are there other packages
which use ITerms except the one in zope.*?
Christian, are you fine with this? Can you based on that
merge your branch to
Hello,
A different question now:
Do we need the attributes
size= alt= maxlength=
for *hidden* text and textarea inputs?
I'm not an HTML guru, but does not seem to make much sense.
(textarea does not have a hidden pt yet, but soon)
--
Best regards,
Adam GROSZER
On Thursday 11 December 2008, Adam GROSZER wrote:
size= alt= maxlength=
for *hidden* text and textarea inputs?
I'm not an HTML guru, but does not seem to make much sense.
No, I think they are not even valid HTML.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
Web Software Design, Development and
Am Dienstag 09 Dezember 2008 16:24:41 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
Hi Brian
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form 2.0 release
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:27:01PM -0800, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 05 December 2008, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Is there any indication on when we'll see a 2.0
Hi Herman
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form 2.0 release
Am Dienstag 09 Dezember 2008 16:24:41 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
Hi Brian
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form 2.0 release
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:27:01PM -0800, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 05 December 2008, Martin
2008/12/10 Brian Sutherland [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Below are the failures, Malthe, would you mind having a look at these?
I'll take a look at them; seems to be __repr__-related all around.
\malthe
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:05:06AM +0100, Hermann Himmelbauer wrote:
Someone recently suggested to rename it to z3c.schema.iban, which sounds a
good idea to me, however, in this case my package would use another package,
namely z3c.schema, as namespace.
So what's your suggestion in this
Am Mittwoch 10 Dezember 2008 13:02:02 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
Hi Herman
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form 2.0 release
Am Dienstag 09 Dezember 2008 16:24:41 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
Hi Brian
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form 2.0 release
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:27:01PM
On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 09:09:26PM +0100, Brian Sutherland wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 04:31:33PM +0100, Malthe Borch wrote:
2008/12/9 Roger Ineichen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree
A package should never use another package as it's namespace.
Which means a package can not be both a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian Sutherland wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:05:06AM +0100, Hermann Himmelbauer wrote:
Someone recently suggested to rename it to z3c.schema.iban, which sounds a
good idea to me, however, in this case my package would use another package,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tres Seaver wrote:
Brian Sutherland wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:05:06AM +0100, Hermann Himmelbauer wrote:
Someone recently suggested to rename it to z3c.schema.iban, which sounds a
good idea to me, however, in this case my package would
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 01:29:49PM -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
Note that the __file__ of the namespace package is not guaranteed to be
in one or the other egg, which is why namespace packages must have
nothing more in their __init__.py than the boilerplate which declares
the namespace.
With
Am 08.12.2008 um 08:27 schrieb Stephan Richter:
On Friday 05 December 2008, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Is there any indication on when we'll see a 2.0 release of z3c.form?
We need a widget that's not in the 1.9 release, but is on trunk
(for a
list with textline value type), and are wondering
Hi Michael
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form 2.0 release
Am 08.12.2008 um 08:27 schrieb Stephan Richter:
On Friday 05 December 2008, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Is there any indication on when we'll see a 2.0 release of
z3c.form?
We need a widget that's not in the 1.9 release
On Tuesday 09 December 2008, Michael Howitz wrote:
There is still the zagy-sources branch which makes z3c.form usable
together with sources (not only vocabularies). I'd be happy to merge
it to the trunk.
I would love to have this branch merged and even wait a few days with the
release
Am 09.12.2008 um 11:01 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
[...]
There is still the zagy-sources branch which makes z3c.form
usable together with sources (not only vocabularies). I'd be
happy to merge it to the trunk.
But it adds a dependency to zope.app.form as it needs
Am 09.12.2008 um 12:15 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
[...]
Should I do that tomorrow? And adjust all related packages
like zope.app.form, z3c.form etc. Are there other packages
which use ITerms except the one in zope.*?
zc.sourcefactory, but I can migrate it myself.
Christian, are you fine with
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:27:01PM -0800, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 05 December 2008, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Is there any indication on when we'll see a 2.0 release of z3c.form?
We need a widget that's not in the 1.9 release, but is on trunk (for a
list with textline value type), and
Hi Stephan, Michael, others
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form 2.0 release
On Tuesday 09 December 2008, Michael Howitz wrote:
There is still the zagy-sources branch which makes z3c.form usable
together with sources (not only vocabularies). I'd be happy
to merge
it to the trunk.
I
Am 09.12.2008 um 11:06 schrieb Stephan Richter:
On Tuesday 09 December 2008, Michael Howitz wrote:
There is still the zagy-sources branch which makes z3c.form usable
together with sources (not only vocabularies). I'd be happy to merge
it to the trunk.
I would love to have this branch merged
Hi Brian
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form 2.0 release
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:27:01PM -0800, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 05 December 2008, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Is there any indication on when we'll see a 2.0 release
of z3c.form?
We need a widget that's not in the 1.9
2008/12/9 Roger Ineichen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree
A package should never use another package as it's namespace.
Which means a package can not be both a package and namespace for
other packages.
Seems to work fine for e.g. ``repoze.bfg``.
Malthe are you aware of this? Can you change it?
I
Hi,
On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 12:15 +0100, Roger Ineichen wrote:
[...]
I do not think there has been progress on the discussion, but
we should just release the zope.browser package with this one
interface in it for now.
Another alternative would be for z3c.form to specify an
ITerms
On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 12:39 +0100, Michael Howitz wrote:
[...] Which Christian? If you mean me [...]
I hope he doesn't mean you. That would increase gocept's
Christian-ratio back to 38%.
SCNR.
--
Christian Theune · [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gocept gmbh co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale)
On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 04:31:33PM +0100, Malthe Borch wrote:
2008/12/9 Roger Ineichen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree
A package should never use another package as it's namespace.
Which means a package can not be both a package and namespace for
other packages.
Seems to work fine for e.g.
2008/12/9 Brian Sutherland [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please let me know if there's a step I'm missing?
There are other z3c.* packages which depend on it, namely
z3c.template
z3c.macro
z3c.pagelet
\malthe
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
Hello,
Coverage seems to burp on chameleon
File /home/adi/z3c.form/src/z3c/form/tests/../adding.txt, line 13, in
adding.txt
Failed example:
testing.setupFormDefaults()
Exception raised:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
2008/12/8 Adam GROSZER [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Coverage seems to burp on chameleon
I just tried a buildout in newest mode and I did not see the error you
pasted. It's important that the CHAMELEON_CACHE flag be set to '0' in
an automated test setup (this is set in the buildout for the test
runner).
On Friday 05 December 2008, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Is there any indication on when we'll see a 2.0 release of z3c.form?
We need a widget that's not in the 1.9 release, but is on trunk (for a
list with textline value type), and are wondering whether to roll our
own or wait for a new z3c.form
Hi,
Is there any indication on when we'll see a 2.0 release of z3c.form?
We need a widget that's not in the 1.9 release, but is on trunk (for a
list with textline value type), and are wondering whether to roll our
own or wait for a new z3c.form release.
Martin
--
Author of `Professional
70 matches
Mail list logo
