On May 11, 5:37 pm, Graham Higgins wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 02:18 -0700, Graham Klyne wrote:
> > I'm trying to use view_config accept parameters for HTTP content-type
> > negotiation, e.g.
>
> I can provide a partial answer ...
Graham,
Thanks for your clarifications.
They raise a couple o
ah! thanks. time to rewrite!
On May 11, 12:40 pm, Michael Merickel wrote:
> The unittest assert* functions have an optional msg parameter.
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Jonathan Vanasco
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> wrote:
> > i'm trying to devise the simplest way to write/manage tests for
> > ancill
The unittest assert* functions have an optional msg parameter.
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Jonathan Vanasco
wrote:
> i'm trying to devise the simplest way to write/manage tests for
> ancillary urls ( legal, contact, etc) and just general 'does this even
> render'
>
> the first generation of
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 02:18 -0700, Graham Klyne wrote:
> I'm trying to use view_config accept parameters for HTTP content-type
> negotiation, e.g.
I can provide a partial answer ...
> I am assuming that this is what the accept parameter is provided for,
> as I can't see any other useful purpose,
i'm trying to devise the simplest way to write/manage tests for
ancillary urls ( legal, contact, etc) and just general 'does this even
render'
the first generation of my tests look like this:
def test_ancillary(self):
urls= [
'/',
'/about',
'/about/
I'm new to Pyramid, Pylons, etc., but have previously used other
Python web frameworks.
I'm trying to use view_config accept parameters for HTTP content-type
negotiation, e.g.
@view_config(route_name='service', request_method='GET',
accept='application/rdf+xml')
def service_rdf_xml(request):
:
Really no, I test it configuring apache (without zpt code) and works.
--
View this message in context:
http://pylons-discuss.1595796.n2.nabble.com/Pyramid-Dojo-tp7545510p7548072.html
Sent from the pylons-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
You received this message because you are s
Hi Robert, and thanks for noticing this.
I've issued yesterday a pull request [0] against cornice that changes
how things are implemented internally so we don't rely anymore this
much on decorators.
I have also made the Service class able to deal with an optional depth
parameter, so you can
just wanted to let you know. I don't really have an opinion on who to
blame. The conditions venusian >= 1.0a5 imposes on callbacks before
invoking them are not met by cornice resources, thus the corresponding
routes will not be registered. I managed to fix the problem in my
cornice fork [1], but on
