Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 3/26/06, yuppie <y.2006_-E2EsyBC0hj3+aS/[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Strange, works for me here and now. I use style_slot in my templates
for CalZope, and they work fine in CPS 3.4.
Yes. That is strange. You were lobbying for replacing the old CMF
five_template by the CMFonFive five_template and after it was added to
CMF 2.0 you removed it from CMFonFive 1.3.
Right, because the one that was in CMF had bugs and to few slots.
Now you wonder why CalZope works with CPS 3.4. It's because CPS 3.4 uses
the old CMF five_template from CMF 1.6, not the broken CMFonFive
template that was added to CMF 2.0.
The replacement I did was done not only in 20 but also the current
branch of CMF which probably was 1.5, then. Otherwise I would not have
been able to remove it from CMFonFive, as I use CMFonFive with 1.5 and
1.6, not with 2.0.
This is the latest revision from the CMF 1.6 branch:
It is shipped with CPS 3.4 and was never changed since the initial
checkin. None of your changes are used in CPS 3.4.
My question is now: Do we really need the CMF-specific slots in the
There is no CMF specific slots in five_template, or at least, there
were none until yesterday.
This is the initial checkin of the CMFonFive five_template in CMF:
The difference between the old CMF five_template and this one is that it
adds 'base' and 'header' which are CMF specific slots.
Or can we switch back to the old CMF five_template that
seems to work fine for CalZope and CPS 3.4?
No, because it didn't work, which is why I replaced it.
You are using the old CMF five_template in CPS 3.4.
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests