Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
> How about starting with "Zope 3 Toolkit" and then moving to "Zope Toolkit"
> after a year or so.
I'll repeat it again: the Zope Toolkit is not intended to fulfill the
same role as Zope 3. You imply something like that here. I know that the
Zope Toolkit isn't the same
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
>> -1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), "Zope 3" *is* a
>> dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
>> believe in. I think the consequences of the brand confusion are hard
>> for t
Andreas Jung wrote:
> In addition, some of the Acquistion test fail when trying to test the
> package alone:
> [...]
> Can anyone reproduce this?
no, i don't see any failures with neither 2.11.1 nor 2.12.1 on a debian
box (32-bit, though).
andi
--
zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - i.
Hey Jonathan,
Jonathan (dev101) wrote:
> I was going to try to further explain my compromise which tried to
> move in the direction you are attempting, but upon reflection decided
> that you are completely right and that no-one else gets it (we are
> all as dumb as stones), so instead...
Am Montag, 20. April 2009 09:35 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
> > ...
> > I never communicated to anyone that I believe that Zope 3 is
> > a successor of Zope 2. Other people pushed that message.
>
> That message has been out there from the start, no matter how
> it arose. One w
Am 07.04.2009 um 20:39 schrieb Michael Howitz:
> Hi,
>
> zope.app.exception depends on zope.formlib to use the NamedTemplate
> for the Unauthorized view.
> As zope.formlib has many dependencies I propose to depend on
> z3c.template to get a named template.
> (Even z3c.layer.pagelet depends on
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Sun Apr 19 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Mon Apr 20 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests.
Test failures
-
Subject: FAILED (failures=8) : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Sun Apr 19 20:55:0
Hi,
I usually love gmail, but in these last discussions I have trouble to
understand, where I should write my reply to, since I can not see a
thread. So I write a reply to the first mail and reference to various
mails below. Sorry for that confusion to the people who use real mail
readers!
I woul
Helmut Merz wrote:
[snip story]
> So that's my story.
>
> @Martijn: do you still have access to the PSU time machine? It
> would be great if you could verify this somehow. Or maybe you
> can even get clearer and more consistent information...
:)
We need to learn more about this Zivilisation! I
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
>> -1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), "Zope 3" *is* a
>> dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
>> believe in. I think the consequences of the brand confusion are hard
>> for t
Hey Patrick,
Patrick Gerken wrote:
[snip]
> I did not check wikipedia, nor did I skim the last three years of
> mailing list traffic, I wonder, did I not do enough thoroughly
> research in 2008?
I think the strong impression was given that Zope 3 was going to be the
new bright future and that Zo
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 08:32:52AM -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Given that definition, Zope Toolkit will start relatively small, since
> much of Zope 3 does not yet qualify. However, as people refine
> packages, the packages will be reconsidered for inclusion in the Zope
> Toolkit, and the Zope
Albertas Agejevas wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 08:32:52AM -0600, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> Given that definition, Zope Toolkit will start relatively small, since
>> much of Zope 3 does not yet qualify. However, as people refine
>> packages, the packages will be reconsidered for inclusion in the
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> 1. "Candidate must be have Zope 3 experience."
>
> 2. "Candidate must be experienced with the Zope Toolkit."
Of course I meant...
1. "Candidate must have Zope 3 experience."
2. "Candidate must have Zope Toolkit experience."
Shane
___
Am Montag, 20. April 2009 16:11 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
> Helmut Merz wrote:
> [snip story]
>
> > So that's my story.
> >
> > @Martijn: do you still have access to the PSU time machine?
> > It would be great if you could verify this somehow. Or maybe
> > you can even get clearer and more consisten
Do we still care about Python 2.4 + Zope 2.12? Do we go Python 2.6 only?
Thanks,
Stefan
On 20.04.2009, at 14:00, Zope Tests Summarizer wrote:
> Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
> Period Sun Apr 19 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Mon Apr 20 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
> There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope
Stefan H. Holek wrote:
> Do we still care about Python 2.4 + Zope 2.12? Do we go Python 2.6 only?
We still care about Python 2.4, I made a premature checkin of a new
zope.session version that is BBB incompatible. Bad me only tested under
Python 2.6 before checking in.
Hanno
> On 20.04.2009, at 1
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 18:42, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> It occurred to me that one simple test of a Zope naming scheme is to
> consider what employers will write in job descriptions.
That's a bloody good point.
--
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 5
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 18:42, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> It occurred to me that one simple test of a Zope naming scheme is to
>> consider what employers will write in job descriptions.
>
> That's a bloody good point.
Thanks. I take it this point reinforces your proposal
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 23:32, Shane Hathaway wrote:
>> Also, it follows the open source tradition of slightly whimsical names. The
>> logo could be a train engine driven by a Zope fish. :-)
>
> Done. Does this mailing list accept attachements?
Wowsers. LOL!
Shane
__
On 4/20/09 3:35 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
>> On Sunday 19 April 2009, Tres Seaver wrote:
>>> -1. As a branding choice (as opposed to a technology), "Zope 3" *is* a
>>> dead-end: it implies a strategy (replacing Zope 2) which we no longer
>>> believe in. I think the cons
21 matches
Mail list logo
