Hi Lennart
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im
> Auftrag von Lennart Regebro
[...]
> Again, these lists are about the development of, not development with.
Can you explain why do you think this makes a difference?
Regards
Roger Ineichen
On 10/8/07, Roger Ineichen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Lennart
>
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im
> > Auftrag von Lennart Regebro
>
> [...]
>
> > Again, these lists are about the development of, not development with.
>
> Can you e
On 2007-10-05 14:30:14 +0200, "Fred Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Meant to send this to the list...
On 9/18/07, Christian Zagrodnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The only thing is, no I'm not going to register every file in ZCML. I
want to use the zc.resourcelibrary.
The follwoing makes it p
Hi Lennart
> Betreff: Re: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev
> andzope-dev lists
[...]
> > Can you explain why do you think this makes a difference?
>
> Because developing WITH Zope2 and Zope 3 are very different.
> The development OF Zope 2 and Zope 3 are not, sincem as
> mentioned
Oliver Marx wrote:
Here is what I told my mother:
Zope 3 is a web development technology that focuses on code reuse,
automated testing and security.
- Code reuse: we can do more in less time.
- Automated testing: Code reuse makes it a much have.
- And with automated testing we can actually pro
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday 07 October 2007 17:13, Martijn Faassen wrote:
I'm not saying an ecosystem approach is bad, if that's what Zope 3 wants
to be. I do think that such an approach needs to be supplemented by a
framework approach (and I've been putting work into one way to do that).
I'm not sure that "library" or "collection of libraries" is the right
term for what we want to be. I think we've been using it because it
stands in sharp contrast to "application", which, BTW, isn't exactly
what Zope 2 is. I think these terms were useful to make some points,
but neither
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday 07 October 2007 21:55, Oliver Marx wrote:
Zope 3 should IMO have a "click clack install" version that makes the
first little app a piece of cake. Add to that a story about flexibility
and automated testing; then even I would buy it ;)
I agree, with the "click,
Yup. Now let's drop the "3" in that sentence, because all of this
applies to Zope software as a whole. This is, in fact, one way to sum
up the way the Zope project as a whole works.
I have no problem with that. The simpler the better. As long as the new
comers learn Zope 3 and not Zope 2.
Ma
Martijn Faassen skrev:
We've worked with eggs for a few months now, with Grok. I can report
that I believe the egg situation is currently massively unusable for
almost all Zope 3 users except, from now on, Grok users, as two people
spent half the week in resolving this problem and figuring out
On 8 Oct 2007, at 13:30 , Oliver Marx wrote:
Yup. Now let's drop the "3" in that sentence, because all of this
applies to Zope software as a whole. This is, in fact, one way to
sum up the way the Zope project as a whole works.
I have no problem with that. The simpler the better. As long as the
Oliver Marx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I have looked at Grok. I love the ideas. But it feels like its a little
>too much convention over configuration. I do not hate zcml. I hate to
>write zcml. If there was a way to auto generate zcml and way to
>overwrite that zcml when needed - then I would
Hi Uwe. I have been thinking of something similar and posted on the list
a couple of weeks back:
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope3-dev/2007-September/023653.html
I want the zcml to be generated with a switch on zc.buildout so all
configuration is auto generated. Currently site.zcml is done
On 8 Oct 2007, at 15:14 , David Pratt wrote:
Hi Uwe. I have been thinking of something similar and posted on the
list a couple of weeks back:
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope3-dev/2007-September/023653.html
I want the zcml to be generated with a switch on zc.buildout so all
configuration
On Monday 08 October 2007 06:56, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Because we have endless confusion between Zope 3 the ecosystem and Zope
> 3 the web application framework.
For me it is exactly the same. Zope 3 is a Web application server. Zope 2 uses
many components of the Zope 3 Web application server.
Hi Philipp
> Betreff: Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: The elevator speech for Zope 3
[...]
> Soon, we will change Grok so that it emits configuration
> actions, rather than doing the registrations right away. That
> way, you will still be able to inspect what exactly Grok is
> doing (for example by dumpi
Roger Ineichen wrote:
Hi Philipp
Betreff: Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: The elevator speech for Zope 3
[...]
Soon, we will change Grok so that it emits configuration
actions, rather than doing the registrations right away. That
way, you will still be able to inspect what exactly Grok is
doing (for
Hi Martijn
> Betreff: [Zope3-dev] Re: AW: Re: The elevator speech for Zope 3
[...]
> Grok *aims* to support reusing bits of it. It hasn't reached
> this goal yet as we focused on making it work first, but has
> been an explicit seocndary goal from the beginning last year.
>
> We need to do s
Hey,
Stephan, I tried to reply to your points but I realized I was getting
lost in a sea of semantics and that it wasn't useful.
> > The Zope 3 web application server is not primarily what the Zope 3
> > project appears to be developing. I strongly suspect there are more
> > users of Zope 3 techn
On 10/8/07, Roger Ineichen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think your mail also means, we can't avoid to have
> Zope 2 topics on the zope3-dev list because Zope 2 is
> going to move to Zope 3 and we have to exchange
> information. Doesn't matter how the list is called.
Exactly.
--
Lennart Regebro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
> Any objections?
>
> This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving
> zope3 developers to the zope-dev list.
+1.
Tres.
- --
===
Tres Seaver
On 8 Oct 2007, at 15:52 , Roger Ineichen wrote:
Betreff: Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: The elevator speech for Zope 3
[...]
Soon, we will change Grok so that it emits configuration
actions, rather than doing the registrations right away. That
way, you will still be able to inspect what exactly Grok is
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Does grok support a component architecture where I can use some
components from or is grok a "use it all or nothing
concept"?
Grok *aims* to support reusing bits of it. It hasn't reached this goal
yet as we focused on making it work first, but has been an explicit
seoc
Hey,
On 10/8/07, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
>> ... emit configuration actions instead of component
> > registrations directly. This is underway, started at the sprint last
> > week by Godefroid Chapelle.
>
> Great! Where can this work be s
Hi Philipp. I am strongly attached to packages and software that is
reusable in and out of zope 3. Explicitly defining configuration using
decorators should keep configuration top of mind (which is where I want
to keep it when I develop) and not interfere with reuse goals. Further,
I don't have
Since it has come up a few times on the checkins list recently, I'd like
to reiterate an important point:
When you split files or packages, you should always use 'svn cp' and not
simply copy the bare files. Because if you simply copy the files from a
checkout to another one, version history is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Another point of feedback:
>
> I saw Stephan's mail on a (partially new) toolchain and somewhat
> extensive workflow on using it. I'm a bit surprised a toolchain is
> necessary and that the workflow is so involved.
David Pratt wrote at 2007-10-8 00:21 -0300:
>Zope 2 is one application among many dependent upon zope 3.
>Zope 3 is different software than zope 2.
I do not argue with you that Zope3 is "different software than Zope 2".
What I argue about is "Zope 2 is an application".
I have seen hundreds of ap
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Oct 7, 2007, at 6:25 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>
>> On 10/6/07, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> - We need to decide what a Zope 3 release is (or maybe multiple
>>> flavors). I favor copying the linux experiences, but
On Monday 08 October 2007 11:06, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Stephan, I tried to reply to your points but I realized I was getting
> lost in a sea of semantics and that it wasn't useful.
I agree
> I'd like to see a separation between what you consider to be not only
> closely allied but *identical*:
On Monday 08 October 2007 15:09, Tres Seaver wrote:
> Presuming agreement on the "known good set" (KGS) term, I would think
> that we have two candidates for what makes up "platform releases"
>
> Frozen Releases
>
I started commenting this section until I saw the one below. I pers
Hi Tres
> Cc: zope3-dev Development
> Betreff: [Zope3-dev] Re: Zope 3 releases?
[...]
> A frozen release would consist of:
>
> - A single, "frozen" KGS (index pages cannot change after release).
Can we use a flag on the server side e.g. in the index page, so
nobody is able to upload files if w
Dieter Maurer wrote:
David Pratt wrote at 2007-10-8 00:21 -0300:
Zope 2 is one application among many dependent upon zope 3.
Zope 3 is different software than zope 2.
I do not argue with you that Zope3 is "different software than Zope 2".
What I argue about is "Zope 2 is an application".
I ha
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Waiting-for-this-discussion-to-die-down-ly
I just counted votes here, there was 11 positive votes
and 2 negative votes.
+1 (Baiju M)
+100 (Philipp von Weitershausen)
+1 (Michael R. Bernstein)
+1 Lennart Regebro
+1 Andreas Jung
+1 Jens Vagelpohl
+1 Chris Wither
Am 27.09.2007 um 10:37 schrieb Michael Howitz:
After thinking it over we decided to implement the first approach
(change z3c.form.validator.Data to read the value of a field
missing in he form on the object).
We put our changes into the branch gocept-invariants.
The reasons to change our de
35 matches
Mail list logo
