On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 10:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kapil,
Right now, the svn transactions are entirely contained within a single
fileops operation: for example a mkdir connects to a transaction root,
performs the necessary operations, and commits, all in one shot.
ok, thats what about
its (cmfsvnbrowser) not what your looking for, if you want a versioning
system integrated with plone (as i recall your original request) i still
think working with zope version control (as i suggested earlier) is more
applicable in the short term.. as an integrated example of doing object
version
On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 19:14, Shane Hathaway wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My initial, uneducated thoughts on the topic were simplistic, but then I'm a
big K.I.S.S. fan: simply pickle the entire object back and forth as one
entity. This means for each object, there
On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 10:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The property schema thing is a good point, though I'm not sure we could ever
do anything about it, not with the purpose to help naive gui clients work
better with the repository.
agreed, its not something to worry about, and such naive
On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 00:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, a very good idea indeed! We'll have to look at that eventually.
The mechanism you describe is preferable, but it should be noted that
subversion properties are easily accessible using the clients.
So long as said properties are
Chris McDonough wrote:
I am keen on such functionality. I will be working on something related
to this in the near future to support a customer. I would be interested
in implementing something like this for Zope 2 as a result. I had
planned on implementing it as a completely external kind of
Jim Fulton wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
The first question is:
Is it a problem to have two packages with names differing only in case?
+1
--
- Michael R. Bernstein
michaelbernstein.com
Author of Zope Bible
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
