On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:02 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
...
*If* someone else had that problem too, I'd propose to change away
from
the fallback of using zope.conf.in (we force people to create the
principals too, don't we?)
This problem hasn't happened very often. I would find having to copy
On Sep 17, 2006, at 3:05 AM, Andreas Jung wrote:
The SVN tag names are bit confusing an inconsistent.
The tagname for the ZODB release used for Zope 3.3.0rc1 is '3.7-
Zope-3.3.0rc1'. Since we want to use the same release for Zope
2.10.0rc1
I don't like that Zope 3.3 appears within in the
On Mon, 2006-18-09 at 07:13 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Sep 17, 2006, at 3:05 AM, Andreas Jung wrote:
but not both and not mixed for the same version. My personal
preference is 'rc'.
My preference is c1.
Not to be picky here, but using just 'c' I know of plenty of versioning
schemas
On Monday 18 September 2006 07:13, Jim Fulton wrote:
but not both and not mixed for the same version. My personal
preference is 'rc'.
My preference is c1.
Me too, because then you have a, b, c. :-)
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D.
Previously Rocky Burt wrote:
On Mon, 2006-18-09 at 07:13 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Sep 17, 2006, at 3:05 AM, Andreas Jung wrote:
but not both and not mixed for the same version. My personal
preference is 'rc'.
My preference is c1.
Not to be picky here, but using just 'c' I
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:02 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
...
*If* someone else had that problem too, I'd propose to change away from
the fallback of using zope.conf.in (we force people to create the
principals too, don't we?)
This problem hasn't happened very often. I
I wasn't sure about the layer to type renaming myself. Plus, it
would've been one of those janitorial changes that just weren't
worth it. That's why I didn't do it.
It looks like the process has already started. Should things
like these be reverted then (zope.app.component.metadirectives):
On Sep 18, 2006, at 7:33 AM, Rocky Burt wrote:
On Mon, 2006-18-09 at 07:13 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Sep 17, 2006, at 3:05 AM, Andreas Jung wrote:
but not both and not mixed for the same version. My personal
preference is 'rc'.
My preference is c1.
Not to be picky here, but using just
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Monday 18 September 2006 07:13, Jim Fulton wrote:
but not both and not mixed for the same version. My personal
preference is 'rc'.
My preference is c1.
Me too, because then you have a, b, c. :-)
+1 for 'c1', because
Dear all,
While I was exploringmy options to implement NTLM authentication, I found some strange behavior of Zope HTTP server.
in zope.server.http.wsgihttpserver.WSGIHTTPServer,
It use below function to handle response's head:
def start_response(status, headers): # Prepare the headers for
10 matches
Mail list logo
