Hi,
On 3/13/12 7:14 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
So far, anyone I'd consider in the target audience who've managed to
reply in this thread have been pretty positive, so that's probably a
good sign.
Sorry, not sure what you mean. Can we pick a name like "integrators"?
and/or "product developers"?
On 13 March 2012 23:10, Alex Clark wrote:
> On 3/13/12 4:01 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>
>> I think you need to look a bit more closely at what the script does
>> before passing judgment. I feel like your comment below misses the point.
>>
>
>
> I understand what you are trying to do, and I'm not p
On 3/13/12 4:01 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
I think you need to look a bit more closely at what the script does
before passing judgment. I feel like your comment below misses the point.
I understand what you are trying to do, and I'm not passing judgement,
so please don't misunderstand why I'm t
On 13 March 2012 18:14, Jens W. Klein wrote:
>
> But isnt there a widely spreaded tool for doing so: GNU Autoconf and GNU
> Automake? It can check if preconditions for building PIL and Zope2
> C-Extensions are meet. This would then end up in a classic CMMI cycle. And
> at the end (after make inst
I think you need to look a bit more closely at what the script does before
passing judgment. I feel like your comment below misses the point.
On Tuesday, 13 March 2012, Alex Clark wrote:
> On 3/10/12 5:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Somewhat inspired by the goals of the ``plone.api``
On 13.03.2012 18:17, David Glick (GW) wrote:
On Mar 13, 2012, at 10:00 AM, Alex Clark wrote:
On 3/10/12 5:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hi,
Somewhat inspired by the goals of the ``plone.api`` initiative and based
on the experience of seeing many, many people struggle to get a "safe"
Plone deve
On 3/13/12 1:17 PM, David Glick (GW) wrote:
On Mar 13, 2012, at 10:00 AM, Alex Clark wrote:
On 3/10/12 5:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hi,
Somewhat inspired by the goals of the ``plone.api`` initiative and based
on the experience of seeing many, many people struggle to get a "safe"
Plone devel
On Mar 13, 2012, at 10:00 AM, Alex Clark wrote:
On 3/10/12 5:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hi,
Somewhat inspired by the goals of the ``plone.api`` initiative and based
on the experience of seeing many, many people struggle to get a "safe"
Plone development up and running due to problems with pollu
On 3/10/12 5:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
Hi,
Somewhat inspired by the goals of the ``plone.api`` initiative and based
on the experience of seeing many, many people struggle to get a "safe"
Plone development up and running due to problems with polluted system
Python interpreters, missing librarie
thanks maurits for your answer.
This is full traceback: http://pastebin.com/rs9hUEtp.
I agree with you about python version. I will try with the 2.6.
About the permission
I disagree. Actually many use cases cover anonymous form fill and does not
necessary have to fire content creation: often
Op 13-03-12 13:30, SauZheR schreef:
in main configure.zcml
1. [...]
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
line 3.
what is that? With this line my zope does not start at all. it reports
"dict are not hashable". (python 2.7, plone4.1)
If I comment out it, simply, all works fine. Product is install
in main configure.zcml
1. [...]
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
line 3.
what is that? With this line my zope does not start at all. it reports
"dict are not hashable". (python 2.7, plone4.1)
If I comment out it, simply, all works fine. Product is installable,
usable,
12 matches
Mail list logo
