Adrian Hungate wrote:
Bottom line, internal bugs to one side, Z2.x works a particular way, and is
documented as doing so. This is a powerful and useful feature, and we are
likely to severly impact the power and process of Zopeing by removing it.
If we are still heading for 10x we should be
From: Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, I'm not so enthusiastic about it. Implicit acquisition in URLs
leads to subtle bugs. One thing that just about every Zope site does is
acquire images using a simple relative URL, but that makes the images
much less cacheable.
Not if you do it
On Thu, 30 May 2002, Chris Withers wrote:
People will be really confused to see such results:
http://www.zope.org/Documentation/ZopeBook/Documentation
http://www.zope.org/Images
Why would they see such URLs?
Normally would not. But if I know such a site is managed by Zope, I can
From: Wei He [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An object (say index_html) is inherited by child objects of the site say
Document to make http://www.domain.com/Document share the upper
level index_html. This sounds good but acutally not I think.
It not only sounds good, but it is good.No, it' is fantastic.
Lennart Regebro wrote:
From: Wei He [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An object (say index_html) is inherited by child objects of the site say
Document to make http://www.domain.com/Document share the upper
level index_html. This sounds good but acutally not I think.
It not only sounds good, but it is
On Thursday 30 May 2002 10:29 am, Lennart Regebro wrote:
It not only sounds good, but it is good.No, it' is fantastic. Amazing.
Totally unbelivingly great! It's one of the best and main features of Zope.
Is anyone relying on your site to provide information? How do you test your
site to make
Toby Dickenson wrote:
My conclusions are:
a. implicit acquisition is dangerous
b. acquisition that searches outside the containment hierarchy is evil.
Im not keeping up with Zope 3 development. how does Zope 3 handle
acquisition?
There is no implicit acquisition in Zope 3. If
://www.haqa.co.uk
- Original Message -
From: Toby Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lennart Regebro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wei He [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope logic
On Thursday 30 May 2002 10:29 am, Lennart Regebro wrote
]
To: Lennart Regebro [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wei He [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope logic
On Thursday 30 May 2002 10:29 am, Lennart Regebro wrote:
It not only sounds good, but it is good.No, it' is fantastic. Amazing.
Totally
, 2002 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope logic
The namspace traversal in Zope 2 severely violates the principle of least
surprise IMO. Although you can use this to clever ends, it opens up many
doors to misuse of a site or even significant security holes.
For instance, it used to be possible
Hi all,
I have tried Zope for a week and found a logic problem.
An object (say index_html) is inherited by child objects of the site say
Document to make http://www.domain.com/Document share the upper
level index_html. This sounds good but acutally not I think.
People will be really confused
Hi,
Wei He wrote:
An object (say index_html) is inherited by child objects of the site say
Document to make http://www.domain.com/Document share the upper
level index_html. This sounds good but acutally not I think.
So do a lot of other people, but not for your reasons ;-)
People will be
12 matches
Mail list logo
