On 2007-09-18 19:51:43 +0200, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Christian Zagrodnick wrote at 2007-9-18 08:35 +0200:
On 2007-09-16 09:03:47 +0200, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Ok, then I suggest:
* Provide an IRequestType interface in zope.publisher
Does this name sound wrong?
On 2007-09-15 17:35:20 +0200, Roger Ineichen [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Ok, then I suggest:
* Provide an IRequestType interface in zope.publisher
* Provide an ++api++ traverser in zope.traversing which does
`getUtility(IRequestType, *name*)`.
* define class IBrowserSkinType(IRequestType)
*
On 2007-09-16 09:03:47 +0200, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Christian Zagrodnick wrote at 2007-9-15 12:34 +0200:
...
Ok, then I suggest:
* Provide an IRequestType interface in zope.publisher
Does this name sound wrong?
It suggests the the interface has to do with request types,
Christian Zagrodnick wrote at 2007-9-18 08:35 +0200:
On 2007-09-16 09:03:47 +0200, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Ok, then I suggest:
* Provide an IRequestType interface in zope.publisher
Does this name sound wrong?
It suggests the the interface has to do with request types,
Christian Zagrodnick wrote at 2007-9-15 12:34 +0200:
...
Ok, then I suggest:
* Provide an IRequestType interface in zope.publisher
Does this name sound wrong?
It suggests the the interface has to do with request types,
maybe browser, xmlrpc, ...
It that what we want?
--
Dieter
On 2007-09-14 18:54:01 +0200, Fred Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On 9/14/07, Roger Ineichen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you register views for a base request type, you
probably will open a backdor in other projects. Because
I'm not advocating registering views for the base request types
Hi Christian
Betreff: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc
On 2007-09-14 18:54:01 +0200, Fred Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On 9/14/07, Roger Ineichen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you register views for a base request type, you
probably will open
a backdor in other projects
On 13.09.2007, at 18:07, Roger Ineichen wrote:
Hi
Betreff: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc
On 13.09.2007, at 17:28, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Christian Theune wrote:
Let me propose a change:
1. We revert the change.
Any news on this?
Yes. Over the last few days I
Am Freitag, den 14.09.2007, 02:49 -0400 schrieb Fred Drake:
On 9/14/07, Christian Zagrodnick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before I'll revert the layer-support will be there in a third party
package, probably using ++api++.
Better to be specific than general when it's for a specific type of
Hi Cristian
Betreff: Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc
[...]
The problem is simple, XML-RPC has used the IBrowserRequest
and now it
uses the IXMLRPCRequest. This is why the XML-RPC views in different
projects don't work anymore. This means the XML-RPC uses a browser
On 14.09.2007, at 08:49, Fred Drake wrote:
On 9/14/07, Christian Zagrodnick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before I'll revert the layer-support will be there in a third party
package, probably using ++api++.
Better to be specific than general when it's for a specific type of
request; why not
Hi Fred
Betreff: Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc
[...]
Can't say I've ever advocated removing that, but I'm one of
those skin-means-request-type folks.
If you register views for a base request type, you
probably will open a backdor in other projects. Because
if someone uses
Christian Theune wrote:
Let me propose a change:
1. We revert the change.
Any news on this?
--
http://worldcookery.com -- Professional Zope documentation and training
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub:
On 13.09.2007, at 17:28, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Christian Theune wrote:
Let me propose a change:
1. We revert the change.
Any news on this?
Yes. Over the last few days I pondered about how to do it without
xmlrpc layers. But there doesn't seem to be a way nice and easy way.
Hi
Betreff: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc
On 13.09.2007, at 17:28, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Christian Theune wrote:
Let me propose a change:
1. We revert the change.
Any news on this?
Yes. Over the last few days I pondered about how to do it
without
hi christian,
On 24.08.2007, at 15:12, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 24 August 2007 02:37, Christian Zagrodnick wrote:
The term skin is probably missleading but was taken to keep it
simple. It's more an api-set.
Then don't use it! Misusing a concept can lead to a lot of confusion.
it's
Christian Theune wrote:
Hi,
Am Freitag, den 24.08.2007, 07:55 +0200 schrieb Jodok Batlogg:
hi christian,
it seems like your recent changes to support skins in xmlrpc views
introduced some troubles.
we spent several hours to debug not working xmlrpc views and finally
found that nailing the
Hi stephan
Cc: Christian Zagrodnick
Betreff: Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc
[...]
The idea is now to register list_foo for different
layers/skins/api-sets. This could also be achieved by
creating dummy
model-objects and/or traversers, but would be much less
Hi Jodok
Cc: Christian Zagrodnick; zope3-dev@zope.org
Betreff: Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: skin support for xmlrpc
[...]
for me xmlrpc is remote procedure call. a rpc has a signature
and always the same result. and as stephan said - traversers
should help here.
Yes, but what does this mean
On 2007-08-24 07:55:08 +0200, Jodok Batlogg [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
hi christian,
it seems like your recent changes to support skins in xmlrpc views =20
introduced some troubles.
we spent several hours to debug not working xmlrpc views and finally =20
found that nailing the zope.traversing
Christian,
I understand the use cases and I see how using the skin concept for
XMLRPC is tempting. But couldn't you have done this is in an extra
package? This way, you wouldn't have had to touch at least three
different zope.* packages *and* risk breaking stuff for the others with
something
21 matches
Mail list logo
