Anthony Baxter wrote:
>
> >>> seb bacon wrote
> > > [CallProfiler]
> > FWIW, my own opinion is that it should not take the 'MonkeyPatch'
> > approach.
>
> Why? Any other approach means a slowdown in the Zope code regardless of
> whether profiling is turned on or off... monkeypatching means you e
Hmm, after looking at the logs, it seems like it's not passing authorization
info through the virtual host proxy rewrite rule.
When I set Apache up to use a proxy rewrite rule, it asks me to log in
instead of showing the folder manager, and the hits come from anonymous:
[apache configuration for
From: "Chris Withers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Gary Poster wrote:
> >
> > If there is any interest in spiffing the Virtual Host Folder up for
> > inclusion in Zope 2.6, I'll do the work. It requires Ordered Folder
0.5.1,
> > and needs just a bit more spiffing.
>
> Why does it require ordered folder?
On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 01:36, Don Hopkins wrote:
> I am now locked out my CMF site, and I can't figure out how to get back in.
> [...]
> I can log into the top level Zope manager, and look at the Zope tree. I just
> can't manage_edit my CMF site.
> When I click on a CMF site in the tree on the left
I am now locked out my CMF site, and I can't figure out how to get back in.
None of my passwords work any more. Recently I had to reinstall the
operating system and change my unix passwords.
But now I can't get back into my Zope CMF sites in order to change the Zope
passwords.
I can log into the t
> My main concern is the use of monkeypatching in the core makes it difficult
> for someone else to release a product that also MPs without them worrying
> about whether something has already patched code. Especially when we're
> talking about MP'ing so many core Zope objects (yes, I count >1
On Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:40, Casey Duncan wrote:
> I agree, monkey patches are perfect for this. That
> makes them totally transparent to the application and
> Zope for that matter. There's nothing wrong with them
> in the right application.
My main concern is the use of monkeypatching in the core m
--- Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>> seb bacon wrote
> > > [CallProfiler]
> > FWIW, my own opinion is that it should not take
> the 'MonkeyPatch'
> > approach.
>
> Why? Any other approach means a slowdown in the Zope
> code regardless of
> whether profiling is turned on or off.
>>> seb bacon wrote
> > [CallProfiler]
> FWIW, my own opinion is that it should not take the 'MonkeyPatch'
> approach.
Why? Any other approach means a slowdown in the Zope code regardless of
whether profiling is turned on or off... monkeypatching means you end
up with zero slowdown when not prof
Perhaps synchronization over ZEO as well as XML-RPC? Thoughts?
Sean
-Original Message-
From: Andy McKay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 5:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
> I'd like to see the ZSynce
> Ive never really understood the motivation for wanting https support
> direct in Zope ZServer isnt robust enough to be exposed to the raw
> internet without risk. Today (and perhaps for the forseeable future,
> because its not clear that Zope want to take on the responsibility of
ZServer ma
> I'd like to see the ZSyncer Product, or a variant thereof, included in
> Zope by default. That is, I'd like "Synchronization", to a be a default
> property of Zope objects, so that objects/content can be pushed and
> pulled between two Zope installations.
Thanks for the enthusiasm but its stil
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 21:25, seb bacon wrote:
> > > Absolutely ... and I would also like to see Richards excellent Call
> > > Profiler service become part of the core.
> >
> > I'm definitely putting the profiler into 2.6 - there's just an open
> > question of where it gets put. The question was asked
Howard Zhang wrote:
>
> Does anybody can tell me why?
You'll have better luck asking on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
zope-dev is for development of Zope itself, not development of appilcations with Zope.
cheers,
Chris
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTEC
Gary Poster wrote:
>
> If there is any interest in spiffing the Virtual Host Folder up for
> inclusion in Zope 2.6, I'll do the work. It requires Ordered Folder 0.5.1,
> and needs just a bit more spiffing.
Why does it require ordered folder? What does that have to do with virtual hosting?
chee
Hi all,
We develop a Website use Zope 2.4.3 and CMF 1.1. Today when I export
the member's properties. I found some member's properties were
disappeared.
The reason I found is these member records stored in portal_memberdata
were lose, but acl_users still has all portal user object( for example,
16 matches
Mail list logo
