Re: [Zope-dev] SiteRoot and VHM

2005-04-07 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On Apr 7, 2005, at 1:45, Florent Guillaume wrote: After spending an hour helping someone debug a site that had an hidden SiteRoot somewhere that prevented a virtual host monster from working, it was suggested to me that if there's a virtual host monster, it should take precedence (and

Re: [Zope-dev] I want Zope 2.9 to use Zope 3's security architecture.

2005-04-07 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On Apr 7, 2005, at 6:50, Andreas Jung wrote: Even small modifications to the security machinery tend to end up in lots of problems. The latest prominent example: the changes introduced with Zope 2.7.3: It took two releases (until 2.7.5) and more than 6 months (at least in my memory) before

Re: [Zope-dev] SiteRoot and VHM

2005-04-07 Thread Tino Wildenhain
Am Donnerstag, den 07.04.2005, 01:45 +0200 schrieb Florent Guillaume: After spending an hour helping someone debug a site that had an hidden SiteRoot somewhere that prevented a virtual host monster from working, it was suggested to me that if there's a virtual host monster, it should take

Re: [Zope-dev] SiteRoot and VHM

2005-04-07 Thread Jens Vagelpohl
On Apr 7, 2005, at 9:08, Tino Wildenhain wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 07.04.2005, 01:45 +0200 schrieb Florent Guillaume: After spending an hour helping someone debug a site that had an hidden SiteRoot somewhere that prevented a virtual host monster from working, it was suggested to me that if there's

[Zope-dev] Re: brain.getObject and traversal

2005-04-07 Thread Chris Withers
Andreas Jung wrote: Chris wants to backport it to 2.7 x; I'm opposed. Your call. If it does not change the default behaviour we have in 2.7.5... why not... Cool, thanks, I'll look at merging for 2.7.6 :-) cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting -

Re: [Zope-dev] I want Zope 2.9 to use Zope 3's security architecture.

2005-04-07 Thread Jim Fulton
Richard Jones wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 02:49 am, Jim Fulton wrote: Paul Winkler wrote: i.e. will I still write: security.declareProtected(SomePermission, 'foo') def foo(self): ... That will work, and I don't see a need to deprecate it.

[Zope-dev] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?

2005-04-07 Thread Andreas Jung
I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and improves building navigation-trees or similar structures. Opinions? Andreas pgp8nmyWX3hEd.pgp Description: PGP signature

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?

2005-04-07 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andreas Jung wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and improves building navigation-trees or similar structures.

[Zope-dev] Re: SiteRoot and VHM

2005-04-07 Thread Laurence Rowe
-1 for removing it. I think it's a cool feature :-) I like the ability to use a 'blank' SiteRoot (one with a blank base and path) in conjunction with an access rule to set request variables when I access my site in through a particular point (eg set the plone_skin variable when I access my site

Re: [Zope-dev] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?

2005-04-07 Thread Florent Guillaume
Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and improves building navigation-trees or similar structures. Opinions? +1 if it's a

Re: [Zope-dev] I want Zope 2.9 to use Zope 3's security architecture.

2005-04-07 Thread Martijn Faassen
Richard Jones wrote: [snip] Is this a general trend for Zope 2? I'd rather see Zope 2 kinda avoid ZCML if possible. The Five integration philosophy at least, is that it makes use of ZCML *possible* in Zope 2, but not at all mandatory. Five tries to mess with the innards of Zope 2 as much as

Re: [Zope-dev] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?

2005-04-07 Thread Martijn Faassen
Andreas Jung wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and improves building navigation-trees or similar structures. Opinions? While the feature sounds cool, I tend to be

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?

2005-04-07 Thread Andreas Jung
--On Donnerstag, 7. April 2005 8:00 Uhr -0400 Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I doubt many folks on this list know the code that well. Are you thinking to lift the features you mention, making them part of the regular PathIndex? Also, what

Re: [Zope-dev] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?

2005-04-07 Thread Andreas Jung
--On Donnerstag, 7. April 2005 14:49 Uhr +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and improves building

[Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-07 Thread Chris Withers
Richard Jones wrote: Is this a general trend for Zope 2? I'd rather see Zope 2 kinda avoid ZCML if possible. It's just one of those personal preference things, I suppose, but I know I'm not the only one who isn't that enamored of the ZCML approach. I actually like having the declarations all in

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-07 Thread Jim Fulton
Chris Withers wrote: Richard Jones wrote: Is this a general trend for Zope 2? I'd rather see Zope 2 kinda avoid ZCML if possible. It's just one of those personal preference things, I suppose, but I know I'm not the only one who isn't that enamored of the ZCML approach. I actually like having

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SiteRoot and VHM

2005-04-07 Thread Paul Winkler
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 12:55:09PM +0100, Laurence Rowe wrote: -1 for removing it. I think it's a cool feature :-) I like the ability to use a 'blank' SiteRoot (one with a blank base and path) in conjunction with an access rule to set request variables when I access my site in through a

Re: [Zope-dev] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?

2005-04-07 Thread Martijn Faassen
Andreas Jung wrote: --On Donnerstag, 7. April 2005 14:49 Uhr +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and

Re: [Zope-dev] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?

2005-04-07 Thread Andreas Jung
--On Donnerstag, 7. April 2005 20:15 Uhr +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: --On Donnerstag, 7. April 2005 14:49 Uhr +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from

[Zope-dev] Re: SiteRoot and VHM

2005-04-07 Thread Laurence Rowe
Paul Winkler wrote: On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 12:55:09PM +0100, Laurence Rowe wrote: -1 for removing it. I think it's a cool feature :-) I like the ability to use a 'blank' SiteRoot (one with a blank base and path) in conjunction with an access rule to set request variables when I access my site

Re: [Zope-dev] To ZCML or not ;-)

2005-04-07 Thread Lennart Regebro
Richard Jones wrote: Is this a general trend for Zope 2? I'd rather see Zope 2 kinda avoid ZCML if possible. It's just one of those personal preference things, I suppose, but I know I'm not the only one who isn't that enamored of the ZCML approach. ZCML started out for me (and as an experinced