But I also have a question. Should we not use another
namspace for Zope packages which depend on Five or
other packages then zope.* or z3c.*?
The package makes no assumptions that Five is available, but there are
tests for a scenario where it is.
\malthe
Philipp von Weitershausen schrieb:
Sebastian Wehrmann wrote:
while using the AbsoluteURL Adapter in a view,
By the way, you're using Five's AbsoluteURL adapter. (It's different
from the one in Zope 3). Also, the patch below seems to be for Five.
Would be good to mention that :).
You are
On 28 Nov 2007, at 11:45 , Sebastian Wehrmann wrote:
Can you round up a test that demonstrates how the current
implementation fails to cover your case and how your suggestion
change fixes that?
While trying to write a test it turned out, that it's not a problem
in Five but in the
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
So zope.app.component replaces the getSiteManager implementation in
zope.component? :-(
Yes.
It's a shame this couldn't have been implemented in a more
component-architecture-oriented way, but I'm guess things get
chicken-and-egg-y at this point?
On Nov 28, 2007 12:29 AM, Nathan Yergler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you follow the wink,
http://www.unicode.org/cldr/repository_access.html has the details to
the files. Currently the latest is at
http://unicode.org/Public/cldr/1.5.0/core.zip.
Zope at this point still uses LDML 1.0
Hi Malthe
Betreff: Re: [Checkins] SVN: z3c.jbot/ Initial import.
But I also have a question. Should we not use another namspace for
Zope packages which depend on Five or other packages then zope.* or
z3c.*?
The package makes no assumptions that Five is available, but
there are
mustapha wrote:
Robert Casties wrote:
Enclosing the words with double quotes has not helped, neither have
backslashes...
You have to enclose your string with double quotes and then with single
quote. So the parser gets the double quotes with the search string
The parser does not
On 28 Nov 2007, at 12:54 , Daniel Havlik wrote:
Am 28.11.2007 um 12:01 schrieb Philipp von Weitershausen:
The problem we tried to solve was: We have a structure of Plone
content objects. We wanted to access a particular one in a view
which can be called anywhere. Therefore we registered this
Martijn Pieters wrote:
On Nov 28, 2007 12:29 AM, Nathan Yergler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you follow the wink,
http://www.unicode.org/cldr/repository_access.html has the details to
the files. Currently the latest is at
http://unicode.org/Public/cldr/1.5.0/core.zip.
Zope at this point still
Roger Ineichen wrote:
Hi Malthe
Betreff: Re: [Checkins] SVN: z3c.jbot/ Initial import.
But I also have a question. Should we not use another namspace for
Zope packages which depend on Five or other packages then zope.* or
z3c.*?
The package makes no assumptions that Five is available, but
Roger Ineichen wrote:
Hi Malthe
Betreff: [Checkins] SVN: z3c.jbot/ Initial import.
Log message for revision 81997:
Initial import.
[...]
+ from Products.Five.browser.pagetemplatefile import
+ ZopeTwoPageTemplateFile
I really like what you are doing, cool ideas!
But I also have a
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
It would be interesting to get in touch with the original authors and
ask them whether zope.i18n's 4 or so dependencies still make it too tied
to Zope 3.
For me, it's be interesting to see what it'd take to drop zope.18n
completely and just use Babel ;-)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Withers wrote:
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
It would be interesting to get in touch with the original authors and
ask them whether zope.i18n's 4 or so dependencies still make it too tied
to Zope 3.
For me, it's be interesting to see
On 11/28/07, Martijn Pieters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 28, 2007 12:29 AM, Nathan Yergler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you follow the wink,
http://www.unicode.org/cldr/repository_access.html has the details to
the files. Currently the latest is at
Tres Seaver wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hey,
On Nov 28, 2007 12:16 AM, Martijn Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We could also consider putting them in some kind
of collective-like SVN repository so that people can
make changes when they need to.
I think this is a great idea as it works
sorry, meant to CC [EMAIL PROTECTED], not zope-dev@zope.org
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hey,
On Nov 28, 2007 12:16 AM, Martijn Jacobs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We could also consider putting them in some kind
of collective-like SVN repository
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
zope.app.component.site contains the LocalSiteManager class. This is the
persistent component registry used in Zope 3's standard ISites. It
inherits from zope.component.persistentregistry.PersistentComponents
which in turn inherits from
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 11:45:10 -0800, Malthe Borch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-1 to magic or weak dependencies.
+1 to test what you fly and fly what you test
I agree. In this case it would make sense to have five.jbot. If
everyone's in favor, I can split it out like that. It's an interesting
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:52:01 -0800, Philipp von Weitershausen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's actually even more restrictive than that: If I read paragraph 5 of
the contributor agreement [1] right, then whoever checks things in must
have the intellectual property over the code, otherwise
On Wednesday 28 November 2007, Malthe Borch wrote:
-1 to magic or weak dependencies.
+1 to test what you fly and fly what you test
I agree. In this case it would make sense to have five.jbot. If
everyone's in favor, I can split it out like that. It's an interesting
situation though because
20 matches
Mail list logo
