-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm wondering, ist it necessary to declare a dependency where we know
that it is a required dependency for another dependency we already
declare? Specifically, if CMFDefault is declared as dependency, is it
necessary to also declare CMFCore
Hi!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
I'm wondering, ist it necessary to declare a dependency where we know
that it is a required dependency for another dependency we already
declare? Specifically, if CMFDefault is declared as dependency, is it
necessary to also declare CMFCore because we know
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 16, 2009, at 13:29 , yuppie wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
I'm wondering, ist it necessary to declare a dependency where we know
that it is a required dependency for another dependency we already
declare? Specifically, if CMFDefault is
Am 16.02.2009 um 13:08 schrieb Jens Vagelpohl:
I'm wondering, ist it necessary to declare a dependency where we know
that it is a required dependency for another dependency we already
declare? Specifically, if CMFDefault is declared as dependency, is it
necessary to also declare CMFCore
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 16, 2009, at 13:50 , Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 16.02.2009 um 13:08 schrieb Jens Vagelpohl:
I'm wondering, ist it necessary to declare a dependency where we know
that it is a required dependency for another dependency we already
declare?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Yvo Schubbe wrote:
Log message for revision 96580:
- dependency cleanup
Changed:
U Products.CMFDefault/trunk/setup.py
-=-
Modified: Products.CMFDefault/trunk/setup.py
===
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Feb 16, 2009, at 17:44 , Tres Seaver wrote:
Can somebody explain the dependency on DCWorkflow's ZCML getting
loaded?
This seems like it should be ripped out: no tests should need to get
actaul DCWrolfow instances
Tres Seaver wrote at 2009-2-14 20:31 -0500:
...
For all its flaws, setuptools fixes a lot of what is horribly broken in
distutils: most of the flaws arise from the choice to stay
pseudo-compatible with distutils, and reuse it, rather than starting
from scratch.
But the dependancy handling is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anybody have a clue what changed in the Python 2.5 tarfile module which
triggers these failures?
[/home/tseaver/projects/CMF/CMF.buildout-trunk]
$ bin/test -s Products.GenericSetup
Running Testing.ZopeTestCase.layer.ZopeLite tests:
Set up
Jens Vagelpohl wrote at 2009-2-16 13:48 +0100:
...
Does anyone else have a specific opinion for this case, disregarding
the five.localsitemanager discussion?
Dependancies should be as loose as possible.
If a component uses CMFDefault but only indirectly CMFCore,
it should specify
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 16, 2009, at 19:10 , Tres Seaver wrote:
Anybody have a clue what changed in the Python 2.5 tarfile module
which
triggers these failures?
Running against Python 2.5.2 using the same CMF.buildout I see no such
failure.
Ran 113 tests
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Feb 16, 2009, at 19:10 , Tres Seaver wrote:
Anybody have a clue what changed in the Python 2.5 tarfile module
which
triggers these failures?
Running against Python 2.5.2 using the same CMF.buildout I see no such
12 matches
Mail list logo
