The following supporters have open issues assigned to them in this collector
(http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF).
Assigned and Open
jens
- "CachingPolicyManager: Make Max-Age parameter dynamic",
[Accepted] http://www.zope.org/Collectors/CMF/405
mhammond
- "Windows Developm
Hi Philipp!
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
yuppie wrote:
Some details:
- I'd like to keep the changes the extension profile makes as small as
possible. So I don't want to change the visible action targets. All we
need are some Method Aliases that point to the views.
- We need new names for
If I want a class to appear in the ZODB, is that just a matter of
subclassing SimpleItem?
What additional attributes do I need to set -- for instance, do I need
to define 'meta_type' for the class?
Can a class be persistent but not have its instances appear in the
ZODB -- for instance, does subcl
On 3/8/06, George Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I want a class to appear in the ZODB, is that just a matter of
> subclassing SimpleItem?
Define "Appear"? :-)
Do you mean that you want it to pop up in the Add menu of the ZMI?
--
Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/
CPS Content M
Instances show up in the list of objects in a container (which may be
equivalent to the class showing up in the Add menu?)
Peace,
George
On 3/8/06, Lennart Regebro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/8/06, George Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If I want a class to appear in the ZODB, is that j
On 3/8/06, George Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Instances show up in the list of objects in a container (which may be
> equivalent to the class showing up in the Add menu?)
Nope, that's not equivalent. I'm not exactly sure what the
requirements are. A getId method, a title attribute and a meta_
In
http://www.zope.org/Documentation/Books/ZDG/current/Acquisition.stx
the examples of acquisition it gives involve classes that subclass
Acquisition.Implicit or Acquisition.Explicit
>From what I can tell from the epydoc documentation of many Zope
classes (e.g. PortalFolder), they do not subclas
On 3/8/06, George Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >From what I can tell from the epydoc documentation of many Zope
> classes (e.g. PortalFolder), they do not subclass either Implicit or
> Explicit. How is it then that they acquire attributes from their
> containers and contexts?
They subclass Imp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On 3/8/06, George Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Instances show up in the list of objects in a container (which may be
>>equivalent to the class showing up in the Add menu?)
>
>
> Nope, that's not equivalent. I'm not exa
George Lee wrote at 2006-3-8 10:17 -0500:
>If I want a class to appear in the ZODB, is that just a matter of
>subclassing SimpleItem?
Usually, classes do not "appear" in the ZODB -- just their instances.
"SimpleItem" is the base class of all (what I call) Zope site building
objects -- the term "Z
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
yuppie wrote:
> Hi Philipp!
>
>
> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>
>> yuppie wrote:
>>
>>> Some details:
>>>
>>> - I'd like to keep the changes the extension profile makes as small as
>>> possible. So I don't want to change the visible action targ
Dieter Maurer a écrit :
> Encolpe Degoute wrote at 2006-3-7 20:33 +0100:
>> I found something funny yesterday that makes me spend some hours:
>> If you delete the state marked as initial state the variable initial_sate
>> always
>> contains its id.
>
> Any workflow needs an initial state.
Any wo
- We need new names for the views. I'd like to use @@view.html,
@@edit.html and @@properties.html for the views that already exist.
I think 'metadata_edit_form' and 'folder_edit_form' are both in
fact properties views and 'folder_contents' is just a special edit
view. I'd like to use the sa
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
- We need new names for the views. I'd like to use @@view.html,
@@edit.html and @@properties.html for the views that already exist. I
think 'metadata_edit_form' and 'folder_edit_form' are both in fact
properties views and 'folder_contents' is just a special edit
On 8 Mar 2006, at 16:52, yuppie wrote:
You could access the edit view with 'edit.html' instead of
'@@edit.html', but that has a major drawback: View names are not
protected in any way if used without '@@'. You can easily screw up
your site by adding content with the ID 'edit.html'.
Names
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 10:52:09PM +0100, yuppie wrote:
> You could access the edit view with 'edit.html' instead of
> '@@edit.html', but that has a major drawback: View names are not
> protected in any way if used without '@@'. You can easily screw up your
> site by adding content with the ID '
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 10:52:09PM +0100, yuppie wrote:
You could access the edit view with 'edit.html' instead of
'@@edit.html', but that has a major drawback: View names are not
protected in any way if used without '@@'. You can easily screw up your
site by adding content
Just FYI, there's now a place for GenericSetup on zope.org:
http://www.zope.org/Products/GenericSetup/swpackage_view
jens
___
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf
See http://collector.zope.org/
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
But changing the visible names is not part of my proposal.
Well, I personally would love to change the visible names. The old names
are worse than the @@-prefixed new names ;)
I agree. But the old names are the status quo. Replacing them by Method
Aliases is
On 8 Mar 2006, at 17:36, yuppie wrote:
Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
But changing the visible names is not part of my proposal.
Well, I personally would love to change the visible names. The old
names are worse than the @@-prefixed new names ;)
I agree. But the old names are the status
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 11:14:59PM +0100, yuppie wrote:
> Paul Winkler wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 10:52:09PM +0100, yuppie wrote:
> >>You could access the edit view with 'edit.html' instead of
> >>'@@edit.html', but that has a major drawback: View names are not
> >>protected in any way if
21 matches
Mail list logo
