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
I have a small issue with zope.testbrowser packaging I'd like to get
some input on. If I were to have started the project today, it would
likely have been zc.testbrowser, which would have no Zope 3 dependencies
(or functionality) and zc.testbrowser.zope, which would have, and
depended on
Hi Benji. I don't like the first option. I am already using a zope
extras to group packages for other reasons and don't really want to mix
this with the test extra. I am trying to use extras as much as possible
opposed to listing reams of packages in buildout.cfg to keep it cleaner
and
Benji York wrote:
I have a small issue with zope.testbrowser packaging I'd like to get
some input on. If I were to have started the project today, it would
likely have been zc.testbrowser, which would have no Zope 3 dependencies
(or functionality) and zc.testbrowser.zope, which would have,
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 Saturday 15 September 2007 08:48, Benji York wrote:
1) introduce a zope extra that everyone will have to use (basically
just rename test to zope;
I prefer this solution. I have done this before for z3c.rml, where I put the
page template support into a pagetemplate extra declaration. I liked
