On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 06:35:11PM +0100, Brian Sutherland wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 10:51:04AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> > >>I am willing to consider a 3.2.1 release for this *after* the final.
> > >
> > >
> > > That would also be fine.
> >
> > OK, if you want to proceed with this, th
Martijn Faassen wrote:
...
But the app server does use parts of Zope 3 that *are* libraries, so
perhaps we should start thinking about splitting things up somehow?
Yes, somehow. :) (I wish I had time to master eggs )
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Power
Jim Fulton wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
While it's true that this is normal for you and me, I think the cause
of "zope is just a library" is much helped if we *also* consider it
normal for Zope to be installed into site-packages.
I'm not convinced that Zope is "just a library". Certainly,
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hey,
Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip]
I'm guessing that this is an issue because you install
Zope's into site-packages and you don't want a Zope installed
package to clobber a package that is separately packaged. Is that right?
The normal way to install Zope is in it's own dire
Hey,
Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip]
I'm guessing that this is an issue because you install
Zope's into site-packages and you don't want a Zope installed
package to clobber a package that is separately packaged. Is that right?
The normal way to install Zope is in it's own directory. In this case,
a p
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 10:51:04AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Brian Sutherland wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 07:13:16AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> > Because I only realized it was causing a headache for me yesterday.
>
> I greatly appreciate your working on Debian packaging. I encourage
> yo
Brian Sutherland wrote:
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 07:13:16AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
...
Why wait until we are close to the release?
Because I only realized it was causing a headache for me yesterday.
I greatly appreciate your working on Debian packaging. I encourage
you to take time-based
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 07:13:16AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Brian Sutherland wrote:
> > Since we are close to the release, I felt compelled to ask before I did
> > this. Could I revert 39890 [1] for the 3.2 release?
>
> No.
Ok, good thing I asked first then;) I'll work around it or wait.
> Why
Brian Sutherland wrote:
Since we are close to the release, I felt compelled to ask before I did
this. Could I revert 39890 [1] for the 3.2 release?
No. Why wait until we are close to the release?
It seems that phillip finished zpkg's module support some time ago [2].
(I ask as this is causi
On Jan 2, 2006, at 3:48 PM, Brian Sutherland wrote:
Since we are close to the release, I felt compelled to ask before I
did
this. Could I revert 39890 [1] for the 3.2 release?
It seems that phillip finished zpkg's module support some time ago
[2].
(I ask as this is causing me headaches d
Since we are close to the release, I felt compelled to ask before I did
this. Could I revert 39890 [1] for the 3.2 release?
It seems that phillip finished zpkg's module support some time ago [2].
(I ask as this is causing me headaches doing the Debian packaging for
the latest zope3)
[1] http://m
11 matches
Mail list logo