Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Collector entries can always be rejected if it turns out there is no
bug. This mailinglist thread will be forgotten next week, though. So,
pretty please open a collector issue.
Fine:
http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/2135
Furthermore, I suggest you wrap
thi
Florent Guillaume wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:
Both core zope and Plone spew forth in their default state.
Zope 2.10 does? It shouldn't. Please point out the deprecation warnings
it sends.
I, like many people I suspect, am still struggling to get projects onto
2.8/2.9. The thought that they
Rob Miller wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:
Both core zope and Plone spew forth in their default state.
the deprecation warnings in Plone annoy me to no end. unfortunately,
though, Plone (thus far) has chosen to straddle Zope release.
I dunno... some, like zLOG, have been "fixable" since at mo
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Follow this thread:
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope3-dev/2005-November/016561.html
*grunt* *sigh*
It has to happen at some stage, surely?
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Chris Withers wrote:
> Florent Guillaume wrote:
>> Chris Withers wrote:
>>> Both core zope and Plone spew forth in their default state.
>>
>> Zope 2.10 does? It shouldn't. Please point out the deprecation
>> warnings it sends.
>
> I, like many people I suspect, am still struggling to get projects
Chris Withers wrote:
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>>
>> Follow this thread:
>> http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope3-dev/2005-November/016561.html
>
> *grunt* *sigh*
>
> It has to happen at some stage, surely?
Jim suggested a different strategy with "Zope 5"
(http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/
Chris Withers wrote:
> Andreas Jung wrote:
>>
>>> I for one, is NOT interested in backporting fixed in Five trunk to
>>> both Five 1.0, 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5, which is what are the current
>>> versions of Five if we say that Zope 2.8 and 2.7 should be still
>>> supported after the release of 2.10.
On 6/21/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There's nothing wrong with software being in production whose particular
line isn't maintained anymore. I have Linux kernels 2.4 and Apaches 1.3
in production. What's your point?
I checked what all my websites run. They are all on
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
So here's a proposal: how about having the following order:
- __bobo_traverse__
- unacquired attribute
- zope 3 views
- acquired attributes
Attached is t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>>> Florent Guillaume wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
> So here's a proposal: how about having the following order:
> - __bobo_traverse__
> -
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 6267
Blamelist: alecm,benji_york,ctheune,fdrake,hdima,jim,mgedmin,regebro,tseaver
BUILD FAILED: failed test
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
Chris Withers wrote at 2006-6-19 14:17 +0100:
> ...
>How would people feel about the default zope.conf hiding all deprecation
>warning?
I would not like it...
> ...
>This seems a better place to me than the current default behaviour of
>"there's loads of these being spewed out, so I'll just ign
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-6-18 12:38 +0200:
> ... deprecation policy ...
>This policy allows us to move forward (which Zope 2 never
>really did for the the majority of those five years you mention).
Although, it might help in a few cases, it is not at all
necessary to cast ones histo
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2006-6-18 02:05 +0200:
> ...
> if hasattr(object,'__bobo_traverse__'):
> subobject=object.__bobo_traverse__(request, name)
If you are working on it, then you should implement a
means that "__bobo_traverse__" can tell the caller that
it should
14 matches
Mail list logo
