Hi Jens!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>> I can't see any additional burden caused by the proposed change.
>
> The burden will appear when people are told or get the impression that
> the package represents the official sanctioned buildout for the CMF as
> opposed to being a developer convenience :-) It
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Yuppie,
> I can't see any additional burden caused by the proposed change.
The burden will appear when people are told or get the impression that
the package represents the official sanctioned buildout for the CMF as
opposed to being a developer c
Hi!
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> On 8/5/10 16:52 , yuppie wrote:
>> Charlie Clark wrote:
>>> I'm actively abstaining as while I understand the need to clean things up,
>>> I'm not sure I understand the whole context (my lack of understanding
>>> rather than any lack of explanation). CMF is actually em
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/5/10 16:52 , yuppie wrote:
> Charlie Clark wrote:
>> I'm actively abstaining as while I understand the need to clean things up,
>> I'm not sure I understand the whole context (my lack of understanding
>> rather than any lack of explanation). CMF i
Hi!
Charlie Clark wrote:
> I'm actively abstaining as while I understand the need to clean things up,
> I'm not sure I understand the whole context (my lack of understanding
> rather than any lack of explanation). CMF is actually empty, isn't it?
> Apart from the history that is.
Well. It has sv
Am 05.08.2010, 15:07 Uhr, schrieb yuppie :
> Any thoughts?
I'm actively abstaining as while I understand the need to clean things up,
I'm not sure I understand the whole context (my lack of understanding
rather than any lack of explanation). CMF is actually empty, isn't it?
Apart from the h
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 3:07 PM, yuppie wrote:
> I propose to merge CMF.buildout back into CMF and to delete CMF.buildout
> in the long run. (Zope2.buildout did have a similar purpose and was
> merged back into Zope.)
+1
Hanno
___
Zope-CMF maillist -
On 8/5/10 15:07 , yuppie wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
> One of these two seems to be redundant:
>
> http://svn.zope.org/CMF/
> http://svn.zope.org/CMF.buildout/
>
> Both have basically the same purpose. CMF.buildout started as a
> playground, but meanwhile that 'fork' supersedes CMF. CMF/trunk seems to
> be un
Hi!
One of these two seems to be redundant:
http://svn.zope.org/CMF/
http://svn.zope.org/CMF.buildout/
Both have basically the same purpose. CMF.buildout started as a
playground, but meanwhile that 'fork' supersedes CMF. CMF/trunk seems to
be unmaintained and I doubt anybody is still using it
Summary of messages to the cmf-tests list.
Period Wed Aug 4 12:00:00 2010 UTC to Thu Aug 5 12:00:00 2010 UTC.
There were 4 messages: 4 from CMF Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : CMF-2.1 Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: CMF Tests
Date: Wed Aug 4 21:59:42 EDT 2010
URL: ht
10 matches
Mail list logo
