Hi,
I am very newbee to Zope. In my Zope application I want to integrate
UserTrack product (we dont use plone). I placed the UserTrack folder inside
the Products directory, and created an instance of UserTrack inside some of
the other zope products, as follows:
u = UserTrack()
Chris McDonough wrote:
Log message for revision 90974:
Added: z3c.pt/trunk/TODO.txt
===
--- z3c.pt/trunk/TODO.txt (rev 0)
+++ z3c.pt/trunk/TODO.txt 2008-09-09 00:03:08 UTC (rev 90974)
@@ -0,0 +1,4
On Tuesday 09 September 2008, Malthe Borch wrote:
If the element belongs to some namespace, then attributes from this
namespace should be native to it. But I couldn't find any
documentation to support that this is a strict requirement. Perhaps it
should be allowed, then.
It's not strict. It's
2008/9/9 Stephan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It's not strict. It's a shortcut.
No it's other way around.
tal:block for= / is the short-cut for tal:block tal:for= /.
Previously only the short-cut was allowed; this has been changed in
the most recent release of z3c.pt.
\malthe
Chris Withers wrote at 2008-9-8 18:34 +0100:
...
There's the backward-compatibility issue, which is a showstopper.
There's plenty of code that does this:
adapter = package.interfaces.IFoo(object, None)
Changing the signature as you describe would break all code that does this.
How
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The syntax would be a bit more cumbersome -- but on the other
hand, it would be more explicit :-)
Seems to me zope.component.getMultiAdapter(...) is sufficient as-is,
and shares the benefit of explicitness.
That's
Rupesh P Raj wrote at 2008-9-9 13:41 +0530:
I am very newbee to Zope. In my Zope application I want to integrate
UserTrack product (we dont use plone). I placed the UserTrack folder inside
the Products directory, and created an instance of UserTrack inside some of
the other zope products, as
El 9 Sep 2008, a las 20:37 , Dieter Maurer escribió:
Chris Withers wrote at 2008-9-8 18:34 +0100:
...
There's the backward-compatibility issue, which is a showstopper.
There's plenty of code that does this:
adapter = package.interfaces.IFoo(object, None)
Changing the signature as you
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
El 9 Sep 2008, a las 20:37 , Dieter Maurer escribió:
But interfaces might grow an additional method, e.g. adapt,
which could get the new signature.
The syntax would be a bit more cumbersome -- but on the other
hand, it would be more explicit :-)
I don't
