In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
, Brian Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Hi guys -
>
>I _just_ checked in a fix for this. A piece of the namespace
>machinery was not updated in the required way to play nice
>with the new infrastructure. I've included the reply I made
>to the bug report:
>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michel Pelletier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
...
>
>Does it work if you:
>
>
> ...
>
>
>and call the namespace directly? The two are supposed to be synonymous
>but your method is depricated so perhaps it works the other way, if not,
>I'd suggest putting this in the
> > The latest CVS version is giving autorization demands (and
> failures) with this DTMLmethod.
> > This kind of construct used to work fine.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 0">non-emptyempty
> >
> >
> >
>
> Perhaps newly created names in the _ namespace do not get
> understood by
> the new s
Robin Becker wrote:
>
> The latest CVS version is giving autorization demands (and failures) with this
>DTMLmethod.
> This kind of construct used to work fine.
>
>
>
>
>
> 0">non-emptyempty
>
>
>
Perhaps newly created names in the _ namespace do not get understood by
the new security g
