Jim Fulton wrote: > > On Sep 16, 2006, at 5:02 AM, Christian Theune wrote: > ... >> *If* someone else had that problem too, I'd propose to change away from >> the fallback of using zope.conf.in (we force people to create the >> principals too, don't we?) > > This problem hasn't happened very often. I would find having to copy > the .in > files to be very annoying unless it was automated in some way. Early > on, the > .in files were changing often enough that you really didn't want to make a > copy of them as you'd miss changes. > > I'm for leaving things the way they are for now. A change I'd like to > see instead, later, > is to require people to create an instance, possibly as part of the > building process. > I'd rather not invest time in that, however, until we have an egg-based > checkout/distribution > mechanism.
I thought that a later build process might involve that. I'll refrain from changing it then. -- gocept gmbh & co. kg - forsterstraße 29 - 06112 halle/saale - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 - fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3firstname.lastname@example.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com