Re: [Zope-dev] zope.site.hooks
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 current site in order to determine a URL leads to a dependency on the ZODB.) +100 if this makes site-aware code have less dependencies. One can really get rid of a *lot* of dependencies this way. That's what I thought ;o) We could investigate two options: * just removing that code that remove proxies and sees what happens to significant Zope 3 code bases. Risky. To begin with, compat-tests of a number of ZTK packages and a lot of the packages under review for the ZTK fail if I do that. This is why I said the code is currently needed. Typically, this has to do with something about interactions not being available to code like zope.component.subscribers(). * alternatively, putting in an optional dependency on zope.security in zope.component. If zope.security proxy is importable, try removing the proxies, otherwise don't. 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. While I can't follow why others consider an optional dependency bad from a technical point of view such as usability on GAE, I think zope.component is so low-level that we should value its conceptual clarity greatly. -- Thomas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope.site.hooks
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 dependent on zope.security all along (requiring one to install zope.component [zcml] which pulls in zope.security if one wanted to use it). I think I'd be willing to use zope.security optionally for the site stuff provided that we can get the GAE users to agree and with the intention of cleaning up things later according to those old comments in the code which I mentioned previously. -- Thomas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope.site.hooks
GAE users and repoze.bfg users as repoze.bfg doesn't use zope.security at all I did a quick grep and it appears that repoze.bfg never actually loads zope.component.zcml so I think if the only dependancies you introduce are via zcml then you should be ok. And given I am running repoze.bfg on app engine it would seem to confirm this ;-) T On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Thomas Lotze t...@gocept.com wrote: 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 dependent on zope.security all along (requiring one to install zope.component [zcml] which pulls in zope.security if one wanted to use it). I think I'd be willing to use zope.security optionally for the site stuff provided that we can get the GAE users to agree and with the intention of cleaning up things later according to those old comments in the code which I mentioned previously. -- Thomas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - zope-...@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope.site.hooks
Tim Hoffman wrote: GAE users and repoze.bfg users as repoze.bfg doesn't use zope.security at all I did a quick grep and it appears that repoze.bfg never actually loads zope.component.zcml so I think if the only dependancies you introduce are via zcml then you should be ok. And given I am running repoze.bfg on app engine it would seem to confirm this ;-) To clarify: We're considering the addition of a module that wouldn't have anything to do with the zcml extra but would talk about zope.security nontheless. Only it wouldn't be a dependency declared in setup.py or in the sense that things would break without zope.security. We'd rather try to import it and if it isn't there, just not do one or two things in the code on the grounds that they'd be irrelevant in that case anyway. As we're thus not requiring zope.security to be installed, I think you should be fine on GAE. I mentioned the zcml extra only because that's how zope.component has to do with the security concept already, as a motivation of why I'm letting go of my opposition to introducing more of that concept into zope.component. -- Thomas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 8 OK
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Tue Oct 6 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Wed Oct 7 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: Tue Oct 6 20:44:56 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012720.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Oct 6 20:46:57 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012721.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Oct 6 20:48:57 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012722.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Oct 6 20:50:58 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012723.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Oct 6 20:52:58 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012724.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Oct 6 20:54:58 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012725.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Oct 6 20:56:58 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012726.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Oct 6 20:58:58 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012727.html ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Proposal: cleaning up the content-type story
Thomas Lotze wrote: I'm still going to move the zope.publisher.contenttype functionality to zope.contenttype which will ease some packages' dependencies, and I'll try to move some appropriate bits of code from zope.mimetype to zope.contenttype. Before doing so, however, I'd like to release the current state of some packages and update their versions in ztk.cfg in order to have a clean state to proceed from. The zope.publisher trunk doesn't work with the zope.app.publisher version from the current ZTK. Also, zope.server, zope.app.authentication and zope.app.i18n need some modifications not yet released in order for their tests to pass with the current zope.publisher. So as a first step, I'd like to release the current code of zope.publisher, zope.server, zope.app.authentication and zope.app.i18n. Can somebody please grant me PyPI rights for these packages? Thank you very much. -- Thomas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Proposal: cleaning up the content-type story
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Thomas Lotze t...@gocept.com wrote: So as a first step, I'd like to release the current code of zope.publisher, zope.server, zope.app.authentication and zope.app.i18n. Can somebody please grant me PyPI rights for these packages? Thank you very much. Granted :) If someone would document srichter's magic grant-all-powerful PyPi script, I'd run it :) Hanno ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Proposal: cleaning up the content-type story
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote: If someone would document srichter's magic grant-all-powerful PyPi script, I'd run it :) That's a horrible thing to do to somebody! Note that I'm not smiling, either. It's too easy to grant people access to way too many packages that way. Somebody ran it for me, without my knowledge, and I learned about a lot of packages I'd never heard of before. That just makes PyPI harder to use when updating something I *am* actually a maintainer for. On the other hand, it got me to prod for a fix to the PyPI bug that didn't let me remove myself from those projects. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr.fdrake at gmail.com Chaos is the score upon which reality is written. --Henry Miller ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Proposal: cleaning up the content-type story
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Fred Drake fdr...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote: If someone would document srichter's magic grant-all-powerful PyPi script, I'd run it :) That's a horrible thing to do to somebody! Note that I'm not smiling, either. It's too easy to grant people access to way too many packages that way. Somebody ran it for me, without my knowledge, and I learned about a lot of packages I'd never heard of before. That just makes PyPI harder to use when updating something I *am* actually a maintainer for. On the other hand, it got me to prod for a fix to the PyPI bug that didn't let me remove myself from those projects. There's both sides: - Once you have access and can release a new version, your mental excuse / barrier for not doing so gets lower. - By having too many, you don't care about any of them anymore. But I think we are still sufficiently few people working on the ZTK, so we can grant all of them access to all ZTK packages. I don't want to give anyone access to all the packages I have. That's Zope + Plone + personal combined and by now about 350 packages. Makes a total mess out of the PyPi UI. But giving people who work on refactoring the ZTK access to the ZTK packages should be fine. Hanno ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Proposal: cleaning up the content-type story
Fred Drake wrote: On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote: If someone would document srichter's magic grant-all-powerful PyPi script, I'd run it :) That's a horrible thing to do to somebody! Note that I'm not smiling, either. It's too easy to grant people access to way too many packages that way. Somebody ran it for me, without my knowledge, and I learned about a lot of packages I'd never heard of before. That just makes PyPI harder to use when updating something I *am* actually a maintainer for. I think the issue this points at is actually with usability of PyPI. There shouldn't be this miles-long list of packages on the right when logged in in the first place. OTOH, even with good usability I'd rather not have rights for packages I'm not interested in, just to be able to deny responsibility if anything goes wrong with one of them. Having rights for all packages involved with ZTK refactorings would be helpful, though. -- Thomas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Proposal: cleaning up the content-type story
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Thomas Lotze t...@gocept.com wrote: OTOH, even with good usability I'd rather not have rights for packages I'm not interested in, just to be able to deny responsibility if anything goes wrong with one of them. It's entirely reasonable for maintainers to have rights for the packages they work on. My objection was to learning about large numbers of packages when someone handed me rights to them on PyPI. Not *exactly* the case here, but I firmly stand against wildly spraying permissions where they're not wanted. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr.fdrake at gmail.com Chaos is the score upon which reality is written. --Henry Miller ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Removing zope.testrecorder from the ZTK
I just noticed that zope.testrecorder, which is listed in ztk.cfg as an included package, imports from Globals, OFS, AccessControl and Products.PageTemplates. This looks to me as if zope.testrecorder shouldn't actually be part of the ZTK. It's also not used by any package mentioned in ztk.cfg. -- Thomas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Removing zope.testrecorder from the ZTK
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Thomas Lotze t...@gocept.com wrote: I just noticed that zope.testrecorder, which is listed in ztk.cfg as an included package, imports from Globals, OFS, AccessControl and Products.PageTemplates. This looks to me as if zope.testrecorder shouldn't actually be part of the ZTK. It's also not used by any package mentioned in ztk.cfg. As one of the last few people to touch zope.testrecorder I should probably speak up with some background. The package was created several years ago to experiment with writing a browser test recorder that could output either testbrowser tests or old-style functional tests. It fell into disuse from almost the start but Philipp brought it out of mothballs to cover in his book. Since then I don't know that anyone has worked on it -- or that it works at all, in fact. I don't have any problem with it being dropped from the ZTK. -- Benji York Senior Software Engineer Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Removing zope.testrecorder from the ZTK
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Thomas Lotze t...@gocept.com wrote: I just noticed that zope.testrecorder, which is listed in ztk.cfg as an included package, imports from Globals, OFS, AccessControl and Products.PageTemplates. This looks to me as if zope.testrecorder shouldn't actually be part of the ZTK. It's also not used by any package mentioned in ztk.cfg. The test recorder is mostly Javascript. The file you saw provides Zope 2 support. It obviously isn't used by Zope 3. The test recorder can (or at least could) be used by Zope 3. In any case, I agree it should be dropped from the ZTK. Jim -- Jim Fulton ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Grok 1.0 released!
Hey, Yay! Zope's caveman spin-off, Grok, finally got its 1.0 release today! http://grok.zope.org Thanks should also go to all Zope hackers for helping to provide the foundation for Grok! Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Removing zope.testrecorder from the ZTK
Hey, Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] In any case, I agree it should be dropped from the ZTK. +1 on dropping it too. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope.site.hooks
Tim Hoffman wrote: On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com 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 the C stuff in zope.security in particular. Big +1 I am using repoze.bfg on app engine (and in the past a minimal zope3 stack) and getting rid of zope.security dependancies (and/or gutting it) in other packages is not easy and would hate see it turn up in zope.component. This would be an entirely optional dependency. The code would work without zope.security being available, just takes zope.security into account when it's there. Note that the 'zcml' extra already depends on 'zope.security'. I'm not exactly happy with that though - perhaps it'd be better if it also was an optional dependency? Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope.filerepresentation release
Hanno Schlichting wrote: On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com wrote: Fabio Tranchitella wrote: * 2009-10-05 12:15, Martin Aspeli wrote: Would anyone mind making a 3.5.1 release, or else give me PyPI rights so that I can do it myself. Shouldn't this be 3.6.0? I don't care one way or the other. 3.6.0 is fine by me. 3.6.0 sounds better. It's a new feature and not a bugfix. Agreed. Thanks Fabio for bringing that up! Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] allow-picked-versions=false in ztk.cfg?
Hi there, To quote Thomas Lotze in another discussion: [ztk.cfg] contains a line allow-picked-versions = false which makes buildout complain if it ends up using a package whose version it had to pick from the index, so you're required to specify a version for every package used by any part of the buildout. This line is a piece of policy that I'd like to see gone from ztk.cfg as well; if someone wants the behaviour, they can specify it in their buildout.cfg. I agree with Thomas that we should remove this from ztk.cfg, as if we publish this for reuse we don't want to impose this policy on everybody who builds on it. The question though is why this is in there in the first place. Presumably it is to ensure that the *ZTK* locks down all versions. I think we can reasonably ensure this by moving the 'allow-picked-versions' to the ZTK's buildout.cfg instead, right? Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope.site.hooks
Hey, Thomas Lotze wrote: [snip] I mentioned the zcml extra only because that's how zope.component has to do with the security concept already, as a motivation of why I'm letting go of my opposition to introducing more of that concept into zope.component. I think it would be interesting to review zope.component.zcml and see how it depends on security, and see whether we cannot make the dependency optional too. After all, most of what zope.component.zcml does has to do with registration, not primarily security. We could have it bail out with an error if a security-related directive attribute was provided when no zope.security is available. Perhaps all the security-related code that zope.component needs to know about could go into a zope.component.security module that the rest of zope.component can import from if needed. This would then do the ImportError check and install dummy functions if zope.security isn't available (or possibly functions that raise the aforementioned exception). Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] allow-picked-versions=false in ztk.cfg?
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 10:29 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: [ztk.cfg] contains a line allow-picked-versions = false I agree with Thomas that we should remove this from ztk.cfg, as if we publish this for reuse we don't want to impose this policy on everybody who builds on it. The question though is why this is in there in the first place. Presumably it is to ensure that the *ZTK* locks down all versions. I think we can reasonably ensure this by moving the 'allow-picked-versions' to the ZTK's buildout.cfg instead, right? Yes, +1 for moving it to the buildout.cfg. Hanno ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Updating the ZTK KGS
Thomas Lotze wrote: 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* that was pulled in by depgraph as well if I wanted to avoid getting buildout errors (some weird version conflict was taking place). I hope that ztk.cfg isn't triggering that. I'd say it does; it contains a line allow-picked-versions = false which makes buildout complain if it ends up using a package whose version it had to pick from the index, so you're required to specify a version for every package used by any part of the buildout. This line is a piece of policy that I'd like to see gone from ztk.cfg as well; if someone wants the behaviour, they can specify it in their buildout.cfg. Agreed. We need to know why it's there first. I'll ask. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Removing zope.testrecorder from the ZTK
Benji York wrote: On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Thomas Lotze t...@gocept.com wrote: I just noticed that zope.testrecorder, which is listed in ztk.cfg as an included package, imports from Globals, OFS, AccessControl and Products.PageTemplates. This looks to me as if zope.testrecorder shouldn't actually be part of the ZTK. It's also not used by any package mentioned in ztk.cfg. As one of the last few people to touch zope.testrecorder I should probably speak up with some background. The package was created several years ago to experiment with writing a browser test recorder that could output either testbrowser tests or old-style functional tests. It fell into disuse from almost the start but Philipp brought it out of mothballs to cover in his book. Since then I don't know that anyone has worked on it -- or that it works at all, in fact. I don't have any problem with it being dropped from the ZTK. I know a lot of people are using testrecorder with Plone. That doesn't mean it has to be in the ZTK of course. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Removing zope.testrecorder from the ZTK
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] In any case, I agree it should be dropped from the ZTK. +1 on dropping it too. Done. -- Thomas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
