On 8/14/06, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Monday 14 August 2006 01:00, Jeff Shell wrote:
> If things slow down... uhm, ever... for us, I'd like to see if I can
> get us to open up some of the more generic toolkits we've built up in
> recent months, as they've been very empowering.
On 8/14/06, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Right, so you fixed the problem with the provider TALES expression,
which has to do update()/render() at the same time. My question
is: How do you know which content providers are used by a view? Do you
manually list them?
A Page class (or
Jeff Shell wrote:
2. There's an 'add to cart' form that is in this page's main template
(or other)
code, and the user has added something to the cart. The 'update' action of
the form adds the item on a post-back. But because it comes *after* the
'cartContents' content provider, the 'cart
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Monday 14 August 2006 05:27, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] gets messages to *all* checkins, no matter which
>> package. THe problem is that you guys aren't subscribed to
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] so your postings don't show up.
>
> Yes, I am. I switch
On Monday 14 August 2006 05:56, Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Monday 14 August 2006 05:27, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] gets messages to *all* checkins, no matter which
> > package. THe problem is that you guys aren't subscribed to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] so your postings don'
On Monday 14 August 2006 05:27, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] gets messages to *all* checkins, no matter which
> package. THe problem is that you guys aren't subscribed to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] so your postings don't show up.
Yes, I am. I switched on the day the list was creat
Roger Ineichen wrote:
> Hi Mailman
>
> [...]
>>> While we are at it, 'lovely' packages do not show up in
>>> http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/checkins until now.
>> Mmh, right. Unfortunately I do not have the permissions to fix this.
>
> If you add lovely to the checkin massages, please add also
Hi Mailman
[...]
> >
> > While we are at it, 'lovely' packages do not show up in
> > http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/checkins until now.
>
> Mmh, right. Unfortunately I do not have the permissions to fix this.
If you add lovely to the checkin massages, please add also
the *z3c* top level namesp
On Monday 14 August 2006 04:30, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
> > Lovely Systems, Roger and I have all been in agreement to publish generic
> > components as we go; if you are subscribed to all check-in messages, you
> > probably saw already a bunch of packages landing in th
On Monday 14 August 2006 01:00, Jeff Shell wrote:
> I (mildly) agree. In my `WebPageSupport` mix-in, I've added a method
> `renderProvider`. Primarily it was to get around calling the provider
> a second time and having its `update` method called again, although
> I've now added some a `hasUpdated`
On Sunday 13 August 2006 08:35, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Yeah, I'm not convinced. At least not by the current Boston skin. I find
> its code over-structured (subpackages just for the sake of subpackages,
> it seems). Also, it isn't as flexible as one would think it is. It
> claims it uses
Stephan Richter wrote:
Lovely Systems, Roger and I have all been in agreement to publish generic
components as we go; if you are subscribed to all check-in messages, you
probably saw already a bunch of packages landing in the z3c and lovely
namespace. We have tasks setup for this week to open/p
On Monday 14 August 2006 01:00, Jeff Shell wrote:
> If things slow down... uhm, ever... for us, I'd like to see if I can
> get us to open up some of the more generic toolkits we've built up in
> recent months, as they've been very empowering.
You should really do this as you code. Not only do you
On Monday 14 August 2006 01:00, Jeff Shell wrote:
> Skinning aside, it's nice to be able to componentize the page. We've
> already made some common Viewlets that can be used in a project with
> very little fuss, such as Menu renderers. CSS applies most of the
> visual styles. The standard template,
On 8/13/06, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For the second edition of my book I have implemented a new skin from
scratch, using a pure viewlet approach. It was surprisingly simple to do
and didn't take a lot of code. The result is very modular. I think a new
ZMI skin for Zope
Roger Ineichen wrote:
> We really should use the Boston skin which offers much more
> flexibility for such customized ZMI's because of it's
> viewlet/manager concept and drop the Rotterdam skin.
Yeah, I'm not convinced. At least not by the current Boston skin. I find
its code over-structured (subp
Hello Carlo.
The implementation of the container is more or less a demonstation on
how to use sqlalchemy object together with a zope container.
To request an object for a zope container a name is used. In the case of
sqlalchemy objects a generalization. This generalization make it
possible to
17 matches
Mail list logo
