Thomas Lotze wrote:
> I thought about that one briefly, but I don't like it because it
> introduces at least some knowledge about the security concept to
> zope.component.
The more I think about it, the less evil this appears to me, though. After
all, the zope.component.zcml module has been depen
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Thomas Lotze wrote:
>> IMO it would be interesting to have the concept of the current site
>> available separately from the rest of zope.site with its 30
>> dependencies. (For example, zope.browserresource demonstrates how with
>> the present zope.site the need to know the
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Whether ztk.cfg can be reused directly or whether we should extract
> something in it with just the version indicators I'm not sure about. I've
> noticed when modifying the buildout.cfg of the ZTK to add
> z3c.recipe.depgraph support that I had to pin down *everything* tha
Tres Seaver palladion.com> writes:
> There is no way to tell the difference between a WebDAV GET and a
> "normal" browser GET, period: the specs explicitly, deliberately
> overload the GET verb.
>
> Hence the IANA-assigned "WebDAV source port"[1] (9800) (which *we*
> requested) in order to disa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>> Can anyone explain why that condition is there? Otherwise, I'll rip it
>>> out. ;-)
>
> As I recall, this code is convoluted because it's hard to tell whether
> an HTTP request is a WebDAV request. I
Hi
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>
>
> Please don't add new dependencies to zope.component. Even optional ones,
> IMHO. It makes it harder to re-use for others and more complex to
> understand. Many people (e.g. those wanting to use GAE) object to t
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> We could investigate two options:
>
> * just removing that code that remove proxies and sees what happens to
> significant Zope 3 code bases. Risky.
>
> * alternatively, putting in an optional dependency on zope.security in
> zope.component. If zope.security proxy is i
Hey,
Thomas Lotze wrote:
> zope.site.hooks is a rather light-weight module that is concerned with
> the concept of a current site, where the notion of a site is used in the
> same sense as in zope.component, which actually prefers to only talk
> about a component registry. In contrast, the rest of
On Sep 14, 2009, at 2:02 PM, Gary Poster wrote:
> Once Bzr 2.0 comes out (in less than a month AIUI), I'll at least
> send out a link to it and point out some changes made that
> specifically address concerns raised by Zope Foundation members when
> I raised Launchpad's/Canonical's offer bef
Thomas Lotze wrote:
[snip]
> - make ztk.cfg available from zope.org (why docs.zope.org, btw?) under a
> versioned URL
I agree we should make it available under a versioned URL somehow.
Whether ztk.cfg can be reused directly or whether we should extract
something in it with just the version ind
Hey,
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
[snip]
> I don't see how a ZTK meta-egg would be of any value. Given that the
> number of packages included in the ZTK will change quite a bit over
> time, it doesn't make sense to depend on a ZTK egg for a package, as
> it doesn't provide any real stable contract. An
zope.site.hooks is a rather light-weight module that is concerned with
the concept of a current site, where the notion of a site is used in the
same sense as in zope.component, which actually prefers to only talk
about a component registry. In contrast, the rest of zope.site deals with
local site m
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Mon Oct 5 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Tue Oct 6 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Mon Oct 5 20:44:55 EDT 2009
URL: http://
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Martin Aspeli
> wrote:
>> Thomas Lotze wrote:
>>
>>> - zope.contenttype: parsing of MIME-type identifiers, guessing the MIME
>>> type of file contents, preferrably without dependencies within the ZTK
>> Can I suggest that we use a diff
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Thomas Lotze wrote:
>
>> - zope.contenttype: parsing of MIME-type identifiers, guessing the MIME
>> type of file contents, preferrably without dependencies within the ZTK
>
> Can I suggest that we use a different name?
Please don't!
We ha
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Thomas Lotze wrote:
>
>> - zope.contenttype: parsing of MIME-type identifiers, guessing the MIME
>> type of file contents, preferrably without dependencies within the ZTK
>
> Can I suggest that we use a different name? 'content type' to me sounds
> like CMS-y functionali
Thomas Lotze wrote:
> - zope.contenttype: parsing of MIME-type identifiers, guessing the MIME
> type of file contents, preferrably without dependencies within the ZTK
Can I suggest that we use a different name? 'content type' to me sounds
like CMS-y functionality. We have interfaces like ICont
On 10/05/2009 02:22 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Thomas Lotze wrote:
>> Having worked on and released new versions of a few ZTK packages recently,
>> I'm tempted to update the ZTK KGS (ztk.cfg) accordingly now. However, as
>> there doesn't seem to be an agreed process about this and in an attempt
>
18 matches
Mail list logo
