Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Sat Oct 10 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Sun Oct 11 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Sat Oct 10 20:47:50 EDT 2009
URL: http://
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Hermann Himmelbauer wrote:
>> That's exactly the problem - it's a read operation and there should not be
>> any
>> write operation involved. However, it's hard to find out where the write
>> operation in my code occurs, I can't find it in
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:56:09AM +0200, Hermann Himmelbauer wrote:
> Am Freitag 09 Oktober 2009 19:12:09 schrieb Shane Hathaway:
> > Hermann Himmelbauer wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I once in the while get the following warning in my Zope 3 log, which I'd
> > > like to resolve:
> > >
> > > 2009-10-07T1
Hello,
* 2009-10-09 15:37, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> I'm okay with *not* doing the split up and going with your idea, but I
> think eventually such a split up would simplify things. One advantage
> would be that someone could examine repoze.zcml and not see distracting
> ZCML implementations in zop
On 10/12/09 01:22 , Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
> Hello,
>
> * 2009-10-09 15:37, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> I'm okay with *not* doing the split up and going with your idea, but I
>> think eventually such a split up would simplify things. One advantage
>> would be that someone could examine repoze.zcml
* 2009-10-12 08:55, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Perhaps it is an idea to make zope.component an extension for
> repoze.zcml? repoze.zcml already exists and works well, and people who
> want the extra zope magic can keep using zope.component. I suspect that
> is less work than trying to split up zope.
