, but given the
resistance I give up my attempt to get this fixed. This is now
http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/2048 and I hope someone else will
fix it.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman
Dieter Maurer wrote:
yuppie wrote at 2006-3-10 20:20 +0100:
...
To support WebDAV as widely as possible, I would prefer to
get rid of all id restrictions. I do not like to see
new restrictions emerging...
You just don't like it or do you know a better alternative?
We need a way to make sure
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
yuppie wrote:
In Zope 3 the NameChooser makes sure you can't use content IDs starting
with '+' or '@'.
Zope 2 doesn't allow '+' in content IDs (actually the error message says
the ID contains characters illegal in URLs), but you can use content IDs
like
this for
their folder implementation, e.g. the CMF might want to do it for their
folders.
We already have @@manage_interfaces and Zope 2 containers will have more
Zope 3 style views in the future. So I think the default in OFS should
be the same as the default in Zope 3.
Cheers,
Yuppie
to use Five technology.
Views are a major feature of Five. Should we warn people not to use
views? Or instruct them how to patch Zope 2 to protect views against
being masked by content IDs?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev
Hi Paul!
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 07:06:28PM +0100, yuppie wrote:
I'm concerned about the people we encourage to use Five technology.
Views are a major feature of Five. Should we warn people not to use
views? Or instruct them how to patch Zope 2 to protect views against
be disallowed in Zope 2 as well.
If there are no objections I'll fix that in Zope 2.8, 2.9 and trunk.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding
Max M wrote:
yuppie wrote:
As of Zope 2.8.2 (http://svn.zope.org/?rev=38738view=rev) the '@'
character is allowed in object IDs.
Zope 3 does not allow object IDs starting with '@' because those names
are reserved for views.
Five makes Zope 3 style views available in Zope 2, so IDs starting
Dieter Maurer wrote:
yuppie wrote at 2006-3-10 12:14 +0100:
As of Zope 2.8.2 (http://svn.zope.org/?rev=38738view=rev) the '@'
character is allowed in object IDs.
Zope 3 does not allow object IDs starting with '@' because those names
are reserved for views.
Five makes Zope 3 style views
more than that...
I guess you are just talking about IFAwareObjectManager, not about
WriteLockInterface and PluggableIndexInterface.
You might want to grep through CMF 1.6 or CMF 2.0 to adjust your
assumptions. IFAwareObjectManager is used in several places.
Cheers, Yuppie
interfaces. There should be no need to use z2 interfaces in products
written for Zope 2.9.
I think this is as hard as it gets for the switch-over to
Zope 3 interfaces, but perhaps I'm missing something.
Don't think so. But there might be other z2 interfaces in use.
Cheers,
Yuppie
Hi Philipp!
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
yuppie wrote:
There are a few places in Zope 2 where they are still used for checks
(mostly webdav, OFS, ZCTextIndex).
In detail these are:
1.) WriteLock: Objects are only lockable if their class has
WriteLockInterface in its __implements__ list
Hi Dieter!
Dieter Maurer wrote:
yuppie wrote at 2005-12-2 16:50 +0100:
...
checkPermission now respects proxy roles, so this workaround is no
longer needed.
But we should also have some way to check permissions without proxy roles:
It sometimes is useful for something with a proxy role
' key because it wasn't enforced until now.
I propose to
- leave Zope 2.7 untouched
- use checkPermission in Zope 2.8 and add the fallback with deprecation
warning
- make the 'permission' key required in Zope 2.9 and later
Any comments?
Cheers,
Yuppie
.
This would make the diffs much nicer when you try to compare trunk and
branch.
Just my 2 cents,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding
mail within
the next few days.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
don't use the deprecated code.
Given the fact that 2 Zope core products still used that code and
given the feedback on this list I didn't remove the code in Zope 2.9.
This should be done in Zope 2.10 instead.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev
/'
return ''
AFAICS it doesn't break anything in Zope itself and that change would
allow to map folderish objects to a file instead of a directory by
setting __dav_collection__ to False.
Any objections?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist
trunk to a different location. That seems to be
completely screwed up.
Similar problems are reported here:
http://buildbot.zope.org/Zope%20trunk%202.4%20Linux%20zc-buildbot/builds/12/compile/0
Is anybody working on resolving these issues?
Cheers,
Yuppie
half of the times. So I could just call python setup.py install with
whatever Python I want in the first place.
Thanks for clarifying.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
Hi Dieter!
Dieter Maurer wrote:
yuppie wrote at 2005-10-27 14:45 +0200:
...
1.) 'action' key:
-
I'd like to give empty 'action' values a special meaning: The meta_type
is not visible in the add drop down in the ZMI.
The five:registerClass directive allows to set empty
Dieter Maurer wrote:
yuppie wrote at 2005-10-27 14:45 +0200:
4.) related cleanup:
Application.install_product has some backwards compatibility code for
products that have initialization code outside the 'initialize' method
of their __init__.py. This is deprecated
branch and to remove
that code for Zope 2.9.
This isn't much work, it can all be done in time for the Zope 2.9 beta.
Any feedback is welcome. If there are no objections, I'll make the
changes as proposed.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev
Hi Tres!
Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
1.) 'action' key:
-
I'd like to give empty 'action' values a special meaning: The meta_type
is not visible in the add drop down in the ZMI.
The five:registerClass directive allows to set empty 'action' values.
This would resolve
be no risk. I guess it
would be useful for many products, at least CMF trunk could benefit from
that bridging code.
Any comments?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
yuppie wrote:
I propose to move the Five bridging code (bridge.py,
fiveconfigure.createZope2Bridge and related tests) to the Interface
package of Zope 2. Five would still ship with a copy of that code for
Zope 2.7 backwards compatibility.
Based on a suggestion from philiKON and some
? If there are no objections, I'll check in these changes.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 7/6/05, yuppie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Five comes with some code that bridges Zope 2 interfaces to Zope 3
interfaces. This way Zope 2 interface definitions can be reused without
adding redundant code.
This is quite useful, but doesn't work for Zope core interfaces
.)
Any opinions?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http
Hi!
Tim Peters wrote:
[yuppie]
http://svn.zope.org/?view=revrev=30334 changed the behavior of
undoInfo() in a way that is not backwards compatible.
That's true, or at least off-by-one different than recent ZODB 3.2s.
Rev 30334 fixed two bugs in the implementation, so that the behavior
Tim Peters wrote:
[yuppie]
...
Don't know what other people think. I believe restoring the old undoInfo
behavior and adjusting the documentation would be the best solution.
Fixing this in undoable_transactions would fork the behavior of both
methods and fixing all products that depend
of
http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1507
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman
Derrick Hudson wrote:
On Sun, May 08, 2005 at 02:28:55PM +0200, yuppie wrote:
| Hi!
|
| On Windows, this 15 months old change in ZConfig sets the default
| hostname for inet_address to 'localhost':
|
| http://svn.zope.org/ZConfig/?rev=376view=rev
|
| I have no idea why this was changed
trunk and Zope 3 trunk to the new versions of ZConfig
and ZEO
4.) fix http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1507 and
http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope3-dev/383
I'd volunteer to do the necessary changes in Zope 2.
Any comments? Any volunteers for the other tasks?
Cheers,
Yuppie
BTW: Why
, not fix them ;)
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http
://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1776
Cheers, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http
Stefan H. Holek wrote:
Log message for revision 30296:
Test interfaces with verifyClass in addition to verifyObject.
[...]
+self.failUnless(verifyClass(IProfiled, Profiled))
Does failUnless make any sense here? verifyClass() is either True or
raises an Exception.
Cheers, Yuppie
.) Adding unit tests that verify interfaces and implementations. [Zope
2.8.0]
Risks
=
I can't see a way to provide backwards compatibility for
Products.Five.interfaces.*, but as explained above I'm hopeful this
doesn't break many Five products.
Any comments?
Cheers,
Yuppie
2.10.
This way, all the work that remains for me is to merge in Five 1.0 into
Zope 2.8.
My point is:
Doing that in a backward compatible way is impossible. So we have to do
it now or never.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev
.
Cheers, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo
Hi!
Martijn Faassen wrote:
yuppie wrote:
[snip]
Current State
=
Five (now part of Zope 2.8) ships with one big interfaces.py file that
contains z3 interfaces for Zope 2 core classes. (There are also some
five specific interfaces in that file, but they are not subject
Hi Philipp!
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Seriously, you should merge your r11978 to the Five-1.0 branch.0
Martijn was faster than I thought :(
I'll follow up to this in an other mail.
I don't think we need to break backward compatability. We would just
need to deprecate
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Proposed Solution
=
[...]
3.) Doing the same for Zope 2.7 with monkey patching code. [Five 1.0+]
I assume here you mean patching in OFS.interfaces, webdav.interfaces etc...
Yes.
4.) Making interfaces.zcml point to the new locations
quickly installed Thunderbird to be
at least a little communicative :).
Sorry. I didn't think Martijn would merge in Five today. Please let me
know if can help to put things straight.
Cheers, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http
2.8).
Done. Five-1.0 and Zope trunk.
Cheers, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
as
Zope 2 interfaces to the corresponding packages in Zope 2.8, using
Five/interfaces.py just as an fallback for Zope 2.7 and old Five products?
If people agree that this is problem, I'd volunteer to help resolving it.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope
we just add
zcml files to the Zope 2.8 packages with Zope 2 interfaces and override
the interfaces in Five.interfaces?
If you want to do this, yuppie, feel free to do it. I would even be ok
for this to be done for the 1.0 branch, provided you also add it on the
trunk.
If I need to change
these errors should be release blockers. Maybe you can run Windows tests
*before* Andreas tags the next beta release?
Cheers, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML
after
themselves? AFAICS two things could help them:
- giving feedback by running nightly test on a not-in-place installation
- reducing the need for setup.py updates by switching to the Zope 3
setup code
Just my 2 cents.
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev
Hi!
Tim Peters wrote:
[yuppie]
I did that more than once,
Did what more than once?
Updating setup.py. (Or reminding people to do it themselves if they add
new files and forget to update setup.py.)
but why can't people clean up after themselves?
Which people, cleaning up what? Sorry, I'm
, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
if setup.py installs Zope correctly and people often forget
to make sure setup.py installs newly added packages and files.
Cheers, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML
, in PythonScripts, ZPT, etc.)?
HTH, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org
, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo
for XML mode?
#1474 is a change backported from Zope3. It was reverted for HTML mode
for apparently the same reason why the XML mode is still broken. I guess
the motivation was to preserve CDATA, but I don't know that for sure.
Thanks,
Yuppie
Fred Drake wrote:
On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:47:33 +0200, yuppie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#1101 looks like someone just forgot to remove a debug assert in
TALParser.py. The Zope3 version doesn't have that assert statement. Or
was there a reason to disable i18n for XML mode?
That's what it looks like
in the Zope
repository or is the SourceForge repository still the primary location?
BTW: Seems the files don't have the right mode. My Windows checkout has
Unix newlines.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
()
context.REQUEST.keys()
print context.REQUEST.other.keys()
return printed
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http
Hi!
Just want to let you know that I'm not happy with the way these two
collector issues were resolved:
http://zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1252
http://zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1308
Hope at least one of them will be re-opened.
Cheers,
Yuppie
, but that doesn't necessarily mean the
products are broken.
- AFAICT many products need some polishing and a new release for Zope
2.8 anyway.
Cheers, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross
, delta, subset_ids=None):
If subset_ids is specified, delta will be interpreted relative to that
subset.
If there are no objections I'll soon check in the necessary changes to
Zope-2_7-branch and HEAD.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman
helpful at all.
If we can get any consensus on this question I'll volunteer to check in
the changes.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding
Hi!
Tres Seaver wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Some grep results from Zope HEAD:
setup.py: #! /usr/bin/env python
test.py: #! /usr/bin/env python2.2
utilities\check_catalog.py: #!/usr/bin/env python2.1
utilities\requestprofiler.py: #!/usr/bin/env python
utilities
And many tests, some of them still with python1.5, e.g.
lib\python\TAL\tests\run.py: #! /usr/bin/env python1.5
Could we have a policy for this? I guess '#! /usr/bin/env python' is
easier to keep up to date ...
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev
Looks like backward compatibility code that breaks backward compatibility.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http
to the last Zope changes. Don't know if
these tests need to be updated or if they reveal a bug in Zope.
Cheers,
Yuppie
==
FAIL: test_createMemberArea
(Products.CMFCore.tests.test_MembershipTool.MembershipToolSecurityTests
') to
_NEED_WRAPPING works for me.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
robert wrote:
I grepped for has_order_support to find out where this happens, but did not
find it.
The Zope 2.7 main.dtml has this code:
_.hasattr(this().aq_self, 'has_order_support')
HTH, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
, this
list is at the bottom of AccessControl.Implementation.
Yes. Adding 'hasattr' (the key for guarded_hasattr) to _NEED_WRAPPING
seems to fix this issue.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
Yep. Sorry for not having checked CMF Head. BTW, Yuppie, can we get a
1.5 soon?
Maybe [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a better place for questions like that?
Today Tres Seaver wrote:
BTW, I plan to post a draft roadmap for CMF 1.5 soon (today, I hope),
and to ask for feedback.
Yuppie
:
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2002-November/018103.html
Maybe the Zope X3 Introspector is a sane solution?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross
Hi Evan!
Evan Simpson wrote:
Done and done!
??? Are you sure?
Today I built Zope 2.7 from a new checkout. And all icons in the ZMI are
broken :-(
They have src paths starting with //
I didn't have a closer look at your checkin, but I'm afraid something
went wrong.
Cheers,
Yuppie
,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
it is the Right Thing to break existing products of people who
read the API documentation and tested their products carefully to fix
the products of people who trusted their intuition?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
Dieter Maurer wrote:
I worked a bit with ZopeHead.
Required CMF patches attached.
Thanks! Based on your patches I made a checkin to CMF HEAD.
Cheers, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
,
+ self._db._classFactory)
Is there any difference between these two execept for whitespace?
Line numbers?
HTH, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML
the beta 3 fixes.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http
or
there are objections regarding the proposed fixes.
Any feedback is welcome.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists
But is it worth to have a CMF 1.4.3 release just to fix this issue?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org
Chris McDonough wrote:
On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 07:33, Yuppie wrote:
But is it worth to have a CMF 1.4.3 release just to fix this issue?
Probably not, at least if your Zope checkin mentions the reason for the
capabilities test and the deprecation warning and maybe the earliest
date after which
occurred all over
their sites.
That's exactly the scenario where I discovered the API change. But it
didn't fix anything, it broke at least the icon paths.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman
/pipermail/zope-dev/2001-December/014601.html
Please be careful with method names that might already be in use in some
products. Google says Silva uses a getVirtualRoot() method. Why not
using REQUEST variables?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev
have a better name) that isn't further modified
on traversal.
'http://example.org/test/path/to/object'
Just my 2 cents.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts
), especially in CMFDeployment. I have no idea if your
change fixes or breaks these products.
Please let me know if you need further information.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
/portal_workflow/default_workflow
No big deal to add docstrings, but what's the policy change?
For better or worse, it has always been policy not to publish objects
without non-empty doc strings.
That's what I thought. But it seems like Zope 2.7 doesn't catch them all.
Cheers,
Yuppie
, in manage_propertiesForm
Module Shared.DC.Scripts.Bindings, line 252, in __call__
Module Shared.DC.Scripts.Bindings, line 281, in _bindAndExec
Module Shared.DC.Scripts.Bindings, line 1, in ?
Module Shared.DC.Scripts.Bindings, line 218, in _getContext
AttributeError: aq_parent
Cheers,
Yuppie
a capability check in reindexIndex.
(Zope-2_6-branch, Zope-2_7-branch and HEAD)
- CMF's CatalogTool should implement the new Interface.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
robert wrote:
I opened an issue in the Zope collector
but I am to dumb to find the CMF collector.
If somebody please points me to it.
http://collector.zope.org/CMF or http://zope.org/Collectors/CMF
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED
1.3.3, Plone 2.x requires CMF 1.4.2?
4.) If you still want to modify Plone 1.x: Search plone-users archives
at gmane for _getViewFor.
HTH, Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross
cases.)
- if collector #1058 should be reopened
- if Zope is currently more broken than before because parts of your
patch are still in CVS
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
the fix for http://collector.zope.org/Zope/1058
(regarding an PropertySheets issue) causes this bug. Can anybody confirm
this?
Or has anybody an other idea which recent change could cause the problem?
Was it really necessary to break backwards compatibility?
Thanks,
Yuppie
zcat.catalog_object(obj, idxs=zcat.indexes())
doesn't, isn't intuitive at all. At least this difference has to be
mentioned in the interface definition.
Just my 2 cents. I can live with both options.
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist
, yes, I need to forward-port the fix to the 2.7 branch and the
HEAD. :-(
I saw you were working on sunday. At least this time you mentioned the
change in CHANGES.txt...
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
-branch, not in Zope-2_7-branch or HEAD
- I can't see what this 'if' is good for anyway
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists
also to update Zope to 2.6.2.
This way CMF / Plone could switch to the new spec.
Just my 2 cents.
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related
? What's the Right Way to do it?
Thanks,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
like PloneFolder in Plone, you could just mix in OrderSupport.
But maybe CMFCore.PortalFolder should mix in OrderSupport? Would that
help to solve your problem?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman
be useful, but I still stand by my
proposal.
Wish you good luck! I'm not very happy with the changes you propose, but
if it helps to convince people ...
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
101 - 200 of 209 matches
Mail list logo
