Op 16 nov 2011, om 11:30 heeft Christian Theune het volgende geschreven:
Hi,
Hello,
I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 16:12, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of
competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be
careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of
CMF skin scripts and
Hi Lennart,
I'm not sure if you're not mixing different issues here.
Am 17.11.2011, 11:35 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com:
Absolutely. Getting rid of CMFSkins is a part of getting rid of CMF,
not a part of moving to Zope 4. Different issues.
I assume you are referring to
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:52, Charlie Clark
charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
Hi Lennart,
I'm not sure if you're not mixing different issues here.
Am 17.11.2011, 11:35 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com:
Absolutely. Getting rid of CMFSkins is a part of getting rid of
Hi,
I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
upfront that one
On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theune c...@gocept.com wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
From my
Hi,
On 11/16/2011 12:24 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theunec...@gocept.com wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
details about that in a bit) we'd
On 16 November 2011 11:30, Christian Theune c...@gocept.com wrote:
Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most
light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.
What is this project? ;-)
Martin
___
Zope-Dev maillist -
On 11/16/2011 12:31 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
On 16 November 2011 11:30, Christian Theunec...@gocept.com wrote:
Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most
light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.
What is this project? ;-)
We're currently sprinting in
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:24, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it
wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to
adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various
different alternatives in
Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com:
Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
confuses the heck out of me.
Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
we're just about at the point where we could switch
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com:
Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
confuses the heck out of me.
Definitely a topic that needs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro
rege...@gmail.com:
Right. Could we standardize on skins or
On 11/16/2011 02:06 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro
Am 16.11.2011, 15:15 Uhr, schrieb Christian Theune c...@gocept.com:
But they also have their merits. If I could make a wish, I'd like to see
a shared implementation that marries all the benefits.
Something I love a lot is the ++skin++ traverser for example. I also
like the idea of tagging
On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com:
Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
On 11/16/2011 04:12 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebrorege...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebrorege...@gmail.com:
Right. Could we
On 11/16/2011 11:30 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.
As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.
From my perspective, I value that
18 matches
Mail list logo
