Am 10.09.2012, 21:54 Uhr, schrieb Leonardo Rochael Almeida
leoroch...@gmail.com:
The expectation is to be able to release a Zope4 alpha by the end of
the year.
Next sprint will be at the Plone Conference in Arnhem, focussing on
WSGI and merging branches.
Hi Leonardo,
thank you very much
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 19:12:16 +0200,
Vincent Pelletier vinc...@nexedi.com wrote :
A wiki page[1] has been set up with a list of subscribers, a topic
list, and general information about transport stay accommodation.
Something I forgot: to subscribe, you should either update the wiki
page or mail
Hi Patrick
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 18:36 +0200, Patrick Gerken wrote:
snip
Since I most often look for the history of something in SVN, I decided
to finally make a git mirror for myself to quickly find the history of
anything I might ever want.
Since its for history only, I just imported the
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Jan-Carel Brand li...@opkode.com wrote:
Do you also sync the git repo with new changes from the svn repo?
Yes, but unfortunately
1. It takes ages
2. I have to do it on my laptop because none of my servers has enough
inodes for that task.
I do it once a day at
Hi,
The ZF notes from May mentioned a VCS discussion. Is this the the
latest thread or did I miss one more current for some reason?
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Alexandre Garel alex.ga...@tarentis.com wrote:
Le 01/02/2012 14:21, Lennart Regebro a écrit :
With dvcs everyone got full history
On 11/17/2011 07:01 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
I would actually argue that Zope4 have no real release cycle at all:
instead, the individual pieces which make up Zope should have their own
cycles, with perhaps a ZTK-like tracking set that Plone and others use as
platform targets.
-1 - we'll need
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:
I would actually argue that Zope4 have no real release cycle at all:
instead, the individual pieces which make up Zope should have their own
cycles, with perhaps a ZTK-like tracking set that Plone and others use as
On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 08:46 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Hi Chris,
For what it's worth, in the Pylons Project, we decided to continue
requiring the signing of a contributor's agreement (more or less the
same contributor agreement as Zope requires). But instead of signing
via paper, we
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 14:29, Alex Clark acl...@aclark.net wrote:
On 2/1/12 8:21 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
Should you then decide
that github is the place to host it, well, then git is the software
to use.
Actually, they introduced improved Subversion client support late last year:
-
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 15:40, Alexandre Garel alex.ga...@tarentis.com wrote:
I'm a bit amazed by this argumentation. I think one important thing is that
subversion is centralized while dvcs are not.
And I think it's very unimportant.
With dvcs everyone got full history of zope libs. I
On Feb 1, 2012, at 00:05 , Alex Clark wrote:
Bottom line: Zope stands to benefit greatly if the current active developers
keep an open mind about how/where/when development of Zope software should
occur. There are plenty of people that still think Zope software is cool, and
plenty of
On 2/1/12 6:08 AM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Feb 1, 2012, at 00:05 , Alex Clark wrote:
Bottom line: Zope stands to benefit greatly if the current active developers
keep an open mind about how/where/when development of Zope software should
occur. There are plenty of people that still think
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 13:03, Alex Clark acl...@aclark.net wrote:
- what RCS software to use
- where to host it
It may be easier if we disentangled them.
Traditionally it was easier, but now-a-days with github and bitbucket they
are harder to disentangle.
It is entangled, but it is
On 2/1/12 8:21 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 13:03, Alex Clarkacl...@aclark.net wrote:
- what RCS software to use
- where to host it
It may be easier if we disentangled them.
Traditionally it was easier, but now-a-days with github and bitbucket they
are harder to
On 02/01/2012 02:29 PM, Alex Clark wrote:
Actually, they introduced improved Subversion client support late last
year:
- https://github.com/blog/966-improved-subversion-client-support
Unfortunately it is too unstable to be usable.
Wichert.
___
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 02:21:32PM +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
What we would like to do, of course, is to have a self-hosted github.
:-) (And that exists. Buuut... it costs $250 per commiter and
year, so that's not an option, obviously.)
Just to be sure I keep the fire on: what about
Le 01/02/2012 14:21, Lennart Regebro a écrit :
I do think the big issue is where to host it. Yes, fine, people have
opinions on git vs svn vs hg, etc. But that boils down to 25%
technical arguments, 25% what you are used to 25% what everyone else
uses and then 30% religion to make sure the
Am 01.02.2012, 15:40 Uhr, schrieb Alexandre Garel
alex.ga...@tarentis.com:
All I see here is usability not religion
Which is pretty much what Jens said originally.
To me, much of the argument seems to be trying to solve a different
problem: getting more people involved in contributing to
On 1 February 2012 14:35, Jonathan Ballet j...@multani.info wrote:
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 02:21:32PM +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
What we would like to do, of course, is to have a self-hosted github.
:-) (And that exists. Buuut... it costs $250 per commiter and
year, so that's not an
On Feb 1, 2012, at 15:53 , Charlie Clark wrote:
Currently the hurdle to getting involved is signing and sending the committer
agreement. A hurdle which I think is worth keeping.
For any code released under the Zope Foundation umbrella that hurdle cannot be
removed, anyway.
To be frank, I
On 26 January 2012 04:29, Christopher Lozinski
lozin...@freerecruiting.com wrote:
Thank you for the sprint report.
I think it is great that you are working on upgrading the ZMI.
I am also turning my attention to this problem. Clearly ZMI needs an
upgrade.
I need an upgraded ZMI.
Today I
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 16:29 +0100, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Feb 1, 2012, at 15:53 , Charlie Clark wrote:
Currently the hurdle to getting involved is signing and sending the
committer agreement. A hurdle which I think is worth keeping.
For any code released under the Zope Foundation
Hi Chris,
For what it's worth, in the Pylons Project, we decided to continue
requiring the signing of a contributor's agreement (more or less the
same contributor agreement as Zope requires). But instead of signing
via paper, we ask that folks sign the contributor agreement by adding
their
Hi,
Late chime-in below:
On 11/17/11 2:45 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/17/2011 01:01 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
On 17 November 2011 16:32, Tres Seavertsea...@palladion.com wrote:
* Zope 4 will not have a release cycle independent of Plone. Zope
Thank you for the sprint report.
I think it is great that you are working on upgrading the ZMI.
I am also turning my attention to this problem. Clearly ZMI needs an
upgrade.
I need an upgraded ZMI.
Today I fired up my old version of ZAM. I can give you a password and
url if you want to see
Op 17 nov 2011, om 20:57 heeft Tres Seaver het volgende geschreven:
Hello,
On 11/17/2011 02:05 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On 17 November 2011 15:23, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 17 November 2011 14:46, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
snip
- Move
On 11/22/2011 11:13 AM, Sylvain Viollon wrote:
Op 17 nov 2011, om 20:57 heeft Tres Seaver het volgende geschreven:
Note that there is a counter-trend here among the Pyramid crew: many
developers *want* tight integration of authentication, particularly the
login forms.
I'm not sure I fully
On 22 November 2011 10:13, Sylvain Viollon sylv...@infrae.com wrote:
Op 17 nov 2011, om 20:57 heeft Tres Seaver het volgende geschreven:
Hello,
On 11/17/2011 02:05 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On 17 November 2011 15:23, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 17 November 2011
Op 22 nov 2011, om 16:36 heeft Laurence Rowe het volgende geschreven:
Hello,
Do you have multiple acl_users folders in a single Silva site? Or is
it simply the same case as Plone where you might have multiple sites
within the one ZODB?
We do have an external users, that can be
Hi,
On 17 November 2011 12:25, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
Along with David Glick, I would like to volunteer for the Zope 4
release management role, where I would take responsibility for
producing the initial release of Zope 4 and David would then take over
for the maintenance
On 17 November 2011 14:46, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
Here's my current understanding of the Zope 4 roadmap.
Zope 4
--
Significant progress has already been made on the following features
and I expect they should all land in time for a Zope 4 release:
- Storing parent
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
... (Interesting roadmap snipped)
This process will necessitate a lot of merging, so I want to propose
that we move to Git for development (something we found very helpful
at our recent San Francisco Zope 4 sprint.) I
On 17 November 2011 15:50, Jim Fulton j...@zope.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
... (Interesting roadmap snipped)
This process will necessitate a lot of merging, so I want to propose
that we move to Git for development (something we found
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/17/2011 07:25 AM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
Along with David Glick, I would like to volunteer for the Zope 4
release management role, where I would take responsibility for
producing the initial release of Zope 4 and David would then take
over
On 17/11/2011 16:32, Tres Seaver wrote:
Note that this question is *not* suitable for loudest voice on zope-dev
wins ressolution. The software belongs to the Zope Foundation, which
will make any such decision.
Small point: the software is open source and anyone who wants can
maintain it
On 17 November 2011 16:32, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
* Zope 4 will not seek to innovate in itself but encourage innovation
in software components shared with the wider Python web community.
I smell something funny in here: if we aren't innovating, why are we
making the
On 17 November 2011 16:32, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/17/2011 07:25 AM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
Along with David Glick, I would like to volunteer for the Zope 4
release management role, where I would take responsibility for
On 17 November 2011 15:23, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 November 2011 14:46, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
Here's my current understanding of the Zope 4 roadmap.
Zope 4
--
Significant progress has already been made on the following features
and I expect
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/17/2011 02:05 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On 17 November 2011 15:23, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 17 November 2011 14:46, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
snip
- Move authentication out to WSGI middleware.
+1 -
On 17 November 2011 19:45, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
Again, this is a choice to be made by the foundation: any polling will
be done by the members of the foundation (this might be the biggest
non-election item on the agenda for the next annual meeting).
When is the next annual
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/17/2011 03:14 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On 17 November 2011 19:45, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
Again, this is a choice to be made by the foundation: any polling
will be done by the members of the foundation (this might be the
On 17 November 2011 20:20, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/17/2011 03:14 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On 17 November 2011 19:45, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
Again, this is a choice to be made by the foundation: any
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 20:57, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
FWIW, the port to Python3 of substantial existing web framework code is
already a dubious proposition: nearly everybody doing it these days is
suffering pain (making their own code more complicated by straddling) in
order
On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote:
Hi.
A couple of us came together before the Plone conference to work on
various Zope related topics. We worked on the following areas:
This sounds like it was a very productive sprint.
Thanks for the update.
Jim
--
Hi!
Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote:
After the last two rather serious security issues that were recently
patched in the Zope2 code base, it is increasingly clear to me that,
differently than what Hanno reported some time ago, it's not so much
the ZMI that represents a huge security liability
On 28/10/2011 08:46, yuppie wrote:
Is that the fault of the publisher? AFAICT the biggest security problem
of Zope2 is this line in OFS.SimpleItem.Item:
# Allow (reluctantly) access to unprotected attributes
__allow_access_to_unprotected_subobjects__=1
I'm not familiar with the
Do we really have to call it Zope 4? :-)
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 15:34, Leonardo Rochael Almeida
leona...@nexedi.com wrote:
Hi,
Sorry for the cross-post, but I'd like to talk about a possible sprint
topic for the next DZUG sprint[1], and invite myself to it :-)
After the last two rather
On Oct 27, 2011, at 16:07 , Lennart Regebro wrote:
Do we really have to call it Zope 4? :-)
Yes.
jens
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related
On 10/27/11 9:05 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
I saw Zope 4 mentioned in public today. This is the first time I'd
seen it mentioned in public.
Is there a more formal announcement anywhere? Is there a description
of what it is envisioned to be?
That came out of this thread on zope-dev back in July:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:26 PM, David Glick davidgl...@groundwire.org wrote:
On 10/27/11 9:05 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
Is there a more formal announcement anywhere? Is there a description
of what it is envisioned to be?
That came out of this thread on zope-dev back in July:
50 matches
Mail list logo
