Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
What I meant: Since is we have things like zope.paste which work fine as
3rd party packages already, perhaps the Zope 3 core just needs to
*support* this separation of server configuration and application
definition, but doesn't necessarily need to *do* it.
On 6 Feb 2007, at 09:59 , Chris Withers wrote:
Why named? If only so you can register many of them, then I call
yagni. Like a unix file system, a zope instance should only have
one root :-)
Sure. But the use of named utilities would make it a tad easier
because you wouldn't need ZCML
On Feb 5, 2007, at 11:41 PM, Fred Drake wrote:
On 2/5/07, Baiju M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have created zope.app egg two weeks back
(http://svn.zope.org/zope.app/trunk/)
I have used setuptools.find_packages function, so setuptools is a
dependency.
Should we need compatibility with
Fred Drake wrote:
On 2/5/07, Baiju M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have created zope.app egg two weeks back
(http://svn.zope.org/zope.app/trunk/)
I have used setuptools.find_packages function, so setuptools is a
dependency.
Should we need compatibility with distutils.core ?
I suspect it's fine
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Why would this be in zope.conf at all?
I would have thought just having a normal zcml setup for a single,
global IRootObjectFactory utility would be fine...
Well, actually, you can't register it through ZCML because ZCML knows
nothing about the ZODB.
Okay,
On 2/6/07, Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An egg should only *depend* on setuptools if it uses things like
pkg_resources (e.g. for namespace packages).
But there's no need to depend on setuptools for namespace packages
generally; that's specific to namespace packages in the
On Feb 6, 2007, at 10:01 AM, Fred Drake wrote:
On 2/6/07, Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An egg should only *depend* on setuptools if it uses things like
pkg_resources (e.g. for namespace packages).
But there's no need to depend on setuptools for namespace packages
On 6 Feb 2007, at 15:41 , Chris Withers wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Why would this be in zope.conf at all?
I would have thought just having a normal zcml setup for a
single, global IRootObjectFactory utility would be fine...
Well, actually, you can't register it through ZCML
hello,
is there any interest from the zope/z3c developers in unifying zope.mimetype
and z3c.filetype?
while the implementation of the packages is very different, the goals of
both of them seem to be the same: to identify the contents of file-like
objects and mark them with an appropiate
Hello
in zope.app.form.browser.widgets.txt there is a Poll demo
I could make it work but I had to do 2 modifications :
replace content_factory=.poll.Poll with class=.poll.Poll in
configure.zcml
and I also had to remove:
factory id=zope.app.demo.poll permission=zope.ManageContent /
Luis De la Parra wrote:
I don't know if there is some licesing or some other kind of political
issues ( zope vs z3c ), but IMVHO it would be great if the two packages
were merged. I'm not really a zope developer yet, but if the maintainers of
those packs are interested, I could try to help with
11 matches
Mail list logo
