Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Hi all,
my work on http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReducingTheAmountOfZCMLDirectives
has been nearly completed on the philikon-reduce-zcml branch and is
ready for review.
What I didn't cover:
* rdb:provideConnection wasn't removed. On a second thought, this
directive
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 08:56:54 -, Martijn Faassen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Before this merge goes through, I would propose the following steps:
Take the document and edit it so it's a clear guide for what you should
do with broken directives. I.e. for browser:localUtility we want to
e
Gary Poster wrote:
On Mar 16, 2006, at 11:42 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
Roger Ineichen wrote:
[snip]
btw,
didn't Gary Poster start a widget refactoring?
Good question. I have no idea what the status of all that stuff is;
whether anything got merged or not..
At ZC, several of u
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 03:31:59 -, Sidnei da Silva
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yum Yum. That reminds me of Archetypes-Hum.
Was that an endorsement or criticism? :)
Martin
--
(muted)
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://ma
Jeff Shell wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
* sources and terms are nice, but we should at least provide some basic
sources and register some basic terms for them; that bit is completely
missing in Zope 3 right now. People should be able to at make a simple
drop-down widget happen without having t
Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip Jim helping me]
Okay, that's one step closer to support for this in the annotation
package, thanks!
I've checked this in last night. There's a README.txt in
zope.app.annotation now too that explains its usage.
Regards,
Martijn
___
Martin Aspeli wrote:
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 08:56:54 -, Martijn Faassen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Before this merge goes through, I would propose the following steps:
Take the document and edit it so it's a clear guide for what you
should do with broken directives. I.e. for browser:local
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> > * rdb:provideConnection wasn't removed. On a second thought, this
> > directive also contains deployment information relevant to the system
> > administrator (the DSN) that should not reside in Python code.
>
> I can see this would be hard to remove.
Well, in the end thi
Martijn Faassen schrieb:
Gary Poster wrote:
[...]
We have an upcoming project that will want the changes. Our current
plan is to develop what we need as "zc.widget" or something, and open-
source it at the end when it's what we need, in the hopes that some
will find it compelling enough to
Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip very clear explanation of how zope.configuration works]
Thanks for putting this all in one place! The bit on conflict resolution
was helpful to my understanding - I hadn't seen it explained so clearly
before.
(Note that a flaw in this model is that we have no good way
Roger Ineichen wrote:
Martijn Faassen schrieb:
Gary Poster wrote:
[...]
We have an upcoming project that will want the changes. Our current
plan is to develop what we need as "zc.widget" or something, and
open- source it at the end when it's what we need, in the hopes that
some will fi
On 17.03.2006, at 10:32, Martijn Faassen wrote:
One problem I seem to have is that I cannot find the mailing list
to subscribe to to find checkin messages to the zc package. Is
there any?
the normal checkin list is [EMAIL PROTECTED], but not all
packages are included (i think only cor
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
By the way, when I deprecate directives, I make the deprecation messages state
what one should do instead of using this particular directive. Most of the
time I print the new ZCML statement that should be used now. You should try
ru
Bernd Dorn wrote:
On 17.03.2006, at 10:32, Martijn Faassen wrote:
One problem I seem to have is that I cannot find the mailing list to
subscribe to to find checkin messages to the zc package. Is there any?
the normal checkin list is [EMAIL PROTECTED], but not all
packages are include
On 3/17/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If no one objects to the branch as it is, I will merge it on the weekend.
I am actively not objecting. :)
--
Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/
CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.org/
_
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
...
(Note that a flaw in this model is that we have no good way to undo
actions. We don't need this for normal execution, but it would be very
helpful for testing.)
Presumably you have thought about the registration of an equal and
opposite action wh
On Friday 17 March 2006 06:34, Jim Fulton wrote:
> The idea is that after applying configuration, you'd keep the
> resolved sequence of actions around so that you could call their undo
> methods later.
Of course, the undo feature has other benefits, such as reloading
functionality without restart
On Thursday 16 March 2006 18:52, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> * class/implements and class/factory weren't removed -- yet. I guess
> removing these might be a bit controversial. I'd therefore like to take
> this opportunity to bring this topic up again and to give everyone a
> chance to look
Jim Fulton wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip]
The idea is that after applying configuration, you'd keep the
resolved sequence of actions around so that you could call their undo
methods later.
Yes, that's what I was thinking of too. Good. :)
[snip]
I was talking to Phil
Martijn Faassen wrote:
One problem I seem to have is that I cannot find the mailing list to
subscribe to to find checkin messages to the zc package. Is there any?
I think there is one, but don't know what it is. :) Instead I prefer to
get my checkin info via RSS. Here's a decent (and improvi
Stephan Richter wrote:
> I am -1 on moving out of the class directive. I am impartial on
> the factory subdirective, since I never use it. I think factories are failed
> experiment, btw, but that's another story.
>
> If is moved out than what's the point of having a class
> directive
> in t
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 09:08:14AM -, Martin Aspeli wrote:
| On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 03:31:59 -, Sidnei da Silva
| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
| >Yum Yum. That reminds me of Archetypes-Hum.
|
| Was that an endorsement or criticism? :)
A endorsement I guess, since Mr. Shell seems to think
On Mar 17, 2006, at 9:13 AM, Benji York wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
One problem I seem to have is that I cannot find the mailing list
to subscribe to to find checkin messages to the zc package. Is
there any?
I think there is one, but don't know what it is. :)
Jim's talked about one.
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 17 March 2006 06:34, Jim Fulton wrote:
The idea is that after applying configuration, you'd keep the
resolved sequence of actions around so that you could call their undo
methods later.
Of course, the undo feature has other benefits, such as reloading
functi
Jim Fulton wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 17 March 2006 06:34, Jim Fulton wrote:
The idea is that after applying configuration, you'd keep the
resolved sequence of actions around so that you could call their undo
methods later.
Of course, the undo feature has other benefits, suc
On Mar 17, 2006, at 4:08 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
[... snip already-answered question (thanks Roger)...]
Doing it in the "zc" namespace is intended to make no assumptions
about what happens with zope.app.form; zc.widget probably will
have some backwards-compatibility
On Mar 16, 2006, at 11:38 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
[...]
Of course, we could also keep the vocabularies in another data
file, and
merely have the high-level directive "source" it:
We have something like this--except the csv connection is spelled in
Python, not zcml--that we have permissi
Gary Poster wrote:
On Mar 17, 2006, at 4:08 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
[snip]
What also got me worried is that the promise of future new widgets
may result in the community doing very little for the time being. We
seemed to have a little bit of momentum to clean up
zo
On 3/17/06, Martijn Faassen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as I understood, vocabularies are on the way out in Zope 3.3:
>
> in zope.schema.interfaces:
>
> # BBB vocabularies are pending deprecation, hopefully in 3.3
That's correct. Gary and I invented vocabularies to solve some
problems. J
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip]
The idea is that after applying configuration, you'd keep the
resolved sequence of actions around so that you could call their undo
methods later.
Yes, that's what I was thinking of too. Good. :)
On Friday 17 March 2006 10:46, Jim Fulton wrote:
> I'll note, however, that I think there will be lots of interesting
> small Python applications that don't use zope.configuration.
> zope.configuration is helpful for providing flexible configuration
> of an application server. I think and hope that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeff Shell wrote:
> On 3/16/06, Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Hmm, another case where high-level ZCML support would be useful:
>>defining simple terms for a vocabulary. Why should somebody who wants
>>to tweak a vocabulary have to
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 11:47:08AM +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> I'm not talking about a proposal. I'm talking about a document that
> describes the changes. I'd suggest basing it on the proposal as you're
> halfway ther already.
>
> What I'm asking for is change documentation per release, at
Jim Fulton wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip]
The idea is that after applying configuration, you'd keep the
resolved sequence of actions around so that you could call their undo
methods later.
Yes, that's what I was thinkin
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
...
Anyway, I've seen lots of
testing code that does not avoid this. The people who wrote this test
might have done it unnecessarily, but that points to doing it the right
way apparently being harder than doing it the wrong way. Are you saying
this
On 3/17/06, Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're missing the point -- the vocabulary is *not* software, and Python
> is *completely* the wrong place to define it: it is *pure* policy. THe
> fact that you are administering all the sites you build blinds you to
> this fact.
Sometimes th
Gary Poster wrote:
Jim's talked about one. This seems like it ought to be it, but the
archives show it to be decidedly dead:
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zopeorg-checkins
I thought that was for one of the many defunct projects to rebuild zope.org?
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix -
On 3/17/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I thought that was for one of the many defunct projects to rebuild zope.org?
I think that's right. The right list should be Zope-CVS, which seems
to be getting email for the separate zope.* projects, but not the zc.*
projects.
-Fred
--
F
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
* class/implements and class/factory weren't removed -- yet. I guess
removing these might be a bit controversial. I'd therefore like to take
this opportunity to bring this topic up again and to give everyone a
chance to look at the proposal once again, before I st
39 matches
Mail list logo
