Hi Chris,
> Sorry, do you mean the box where the Zope 2.9.1 distro was built or the
> one where I was installing it?
The latter.
> If the latter, how dowe fix Zope so it doesn't get tripped up by other
> pywin32 distros on the same box?
If this is the problem, it will probably only happen when
Mark Hammond wrote:
If this is the problem, it will probably only happen when using
runzope.bat - running as a service probably works fine.
Ah, okay, yeah, I only use runzope...
In that case, the problem is the order that Windows uses to search for DLLs.
The short answer is that things should
> > * that directory is on your PATH before the Windows SYSTEM32 directory
> > (which is where pywin32 sticks its copy of these files, for
> various reasons)
>
> Do both this and the above have to be true, or will things work if
> either of them are true?
Either one has the end result of locating
Andreas Jung wrote:
> Zope 2.8 ships/shipped with Five 1.0 which is very old and no longer
> actively maintained. Most ppl doing currently development with Zope
> 2.8 are using Five 1.2. Should we upgrade the Five version in Zope
> 2.8 to Five 1.2 to make their lives a bit easier? There is possi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27 Mar 2006, at 11:55, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Zope 2.8 ships/shipped with Five 1.0 which is very old and no longer
actively maintained. Most ppl doing currently development with Zope
2.8 are using Five 1.2. Should
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Withers wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
CMF or not - if one need such a functionality one can download CMF or
a related product. If such functionality should belong into the core
than it should be implemented in a reusable wa
+1
On 27. Mär 2006, at 07:35, Andreas Jung wrote:
Zope 2.8 ships/shipped with Five 1.0 which is very old and no longer
actively maintained. Most ppl doing currently development with Zope
2.8
are using Five 1.2. Should we upgrade the Five version in Zope 2.8
to Five 1.2 to make their lives a
Hi all,
two weeks ago, I submitted a patch against Zope-2.9.1 that makes the
'MS-Author-Via' header configurable in zope.conf (
http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1441 ) but I did not hear a single
comment about it, so I'm guessing nobody noticed it.
As the original collector entry referred to Z
--On 27. März 2006 16:16:11 +0200 Patrick Decat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,
two weeks ago, I submitted a patch against Zope-2.9.1 that makes the
'MS-Author-Via' header configurable in zope.conf (
http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1441 ) but I did not hear a single
comment about it, s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Patrick Decat wrote:
> two weeks ago, I submitted a patch against Zope-2.9.1 that makes the
> 'MS-Author-Via' header configurable in zope.conf (
> http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1441 ) but I did not hear a single
> comment about it, so I'm guessi
OK, sorry about raising an issue that I was not around to comment on.
First, there seems to be a good deal of confusion on what FileSystemSite
or the DirectoryView portions of CMF are. They are simply a way to have
Zope2 programmatic content stored directly on the filesystem, including
dtml, page
On Mon, 2006-27-03 at 07:35 +0200, Andreas Jung wrote:
> Zope 2.8 ships/shipped with Five 1.0 which is very old and no longer
> actively maintained. Most ppl doing currently development with Zope 2.8
> are using Five 1.2. Should we upgrade the Five version in Zope 2.8 to Five
> 1.2 to make their l
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27 Mar 2006, at 11:55, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Zope 2.8 ships/shipped with Five 1.0 which is very old and no longer
actively maintained. Most ppl doing currently development with Zope
2.8 are u
Andreas Jung zopyx.com> writes:
...
> Should we upgrade the Five version in Zope 2.8 to Five
> 1.2 to make their lives a bit easier?
+1 on a 2.8.7 with a viable Five.
Alec Mitchell
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://ma
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote at 2006-3-27 11:10 -0500:
> ...
>CMF is a lot of overhead
"Overhead" of what kind?
>to pull in just to get DirectoryView, and exactly
>what to install to get DirectoryView and as little else as possible
>installed
>is not documented.
You install "Products/CMFCore" and re
-1... Five 1.2 has quite a few differences from Five 1.0 that would
stop products written for Five 1.0 from working properly. I've not
gone to 2.9 on a few projects for this reason (sticking with 2.8).
2.9 is where the new version belongs, IMO.
- C
On Mar 27, 2006, at 12:35 AM, Andreas J
Dieter Maurer wrote:
>>I've been noticing a situation for some time that my 2.8.5 Z2 is running
>>out of threads. When doing an lsof on it, I see a large number of TCP
>>handles in CLOSE_WAIT state.
>>
>>It seems something's not properly clearing down the connection to
>>release the thread.
>
>
Tres Seaver wrote:
I don't get what you mean: FilesystemSite *is* a separate packaging of
the DirectoryView /FS{DTMLMethod/PythonScript/PageTemplate/SQLMethod}
stuff, without any CMF dependencies.
Yes, exactly, there are several of them. Usually forked off from CMF's
DirectoryView at some poi
Chris McDonough wrote:
> -1... Five 1.2 has quite a few differences from Five 1.0 that would stop
> products written for Five 1.0 from working properly. I've not gone to
> 2.9 on a few projects for this reason (sticking with 2.8). 2.9 is where
> the new version belongs, IMO.
Out of curiosity, wh
19 matches
Mail list logo