Lennart Regebro said the following on 09/07/2006 05:50 PM:
> On 9/7/06, Rocky Burt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> My experience so far... after not having touched a project for over a
>> year and than the client wanting some work done, they usually expect to
>> have to pay to have it upgraded.
>
>
Christian Theune wrote:
But changing APIs is what we do, and what we probably have to do, and
probably keep doing.
I would prefer to see as much of this as possible turned into the past
tense...
Yup. But it isn't, yet. Unfortunately.
Yes, but how much of this is by necessity and how much is
i have a small problem using pydoc to look at the Zope3 source, namely
zope.proxy and modules where zope.proxy is included:
running "pydoc2.4 zope.proxy" or "pydoc2.4 zope.proxy._zope_proxy_proxy"
from the shell yields
problem in zope.component - ImportError:
/path/to/Zope3/src/zope/proxy/_z
Hi!
Recently I started to use formlib in Zope 2. The current stable release
of Zope 3 is shipped with Zope 2.9, so I thought I would use actively
maintained code.
But I stumbled over some rough edges in zope.formlib and zope.app.form
and started to wonder if I'm the first person who tries t
On 9/8/06, Dario Lopez-Kästen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Lennart Regebro said the following on 09/07/2006 05:50 PM:
> On 9/7/06, Rocky Burt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> My experience so far... after not having touched a project for over a
>> year and than the client wanting some work done, they
Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
i have a small problem using pydoc to look at the Zope3 source, namely
zope.proxy and modules where zope.proxy is included:
running "pydoc2.4 zope.proxy" or "pydoc2.4 zope.proxy._zope_proxy_proxy"
from the shell yields
problem in zope.component - ImportError:
/p
Lennart Regebro wrote:
Well What is "a lot". Migrating software from 3.1 to 3.3 shouldn't
take much more than a day or so, since the incompatibilities should be
mostly BBB marked. Once you have figured out how do move one specific
API use or ZCML statement changing the reast of the same type is
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7533
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7533
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux tlotze.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7533
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev maili
yuppie wrote:
[snip]
I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's
no general solution for keeping the current stable branch maintained.
I think you bring up a very good point. Of course this also implies new
Zope 2 release which include bugfix releases of Zope 3.2. It
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7534
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Windows 2000
zc-bbwin3.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7533
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7534
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux tlotze.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7534
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev maili
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7538
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7538
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux tlotze.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7538
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope3-dev maili
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Windows 2000
zc-bbwin3.
Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/
Build Reason: changes
Build Source Stamp: 7538
Blamelist: flox
BUILD FAILED: failed test_2
sincerely,
-The Buildbot
___
Zope
Florent Xicluna wrote:
Log message for revision 70047:
Make deprecated packages zope.app.layers and zope.app.skins optional.
By the way, a zcml feature 'deprecatedlayers' is added.
Hi Florent,
has there been a proposal for this change? Changes that might affect
backward compability should
Hi,
Chris Withers wrote:
> Christian Theune wrote:
But changing APIs is what we do, and what we probably have to do, and
probably keep doing.
>>> I would prefer to see as much of this as possible turned into the past
>>> tense...
>>
>> Yup. But it isn't, yet. Unfortunately.
>
> Yes, but
On Friday 08 September 2006 03:13, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> i have a small problem using pydoc to look at the Zope3 source, namely
> zope.proxy and modules where zope.proxy is included:
Why would you use pydoc? Any conventional documentation tools are useless in
Zope 3, because they do not
On Friday 08 September 2006 04:12, yuppie wrote:
> Are there good reasons why these changes were not backported?
>
> I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's
> no general solution for keeping the current stable branch maintained.
The short answer is: We are a bit slop
On Thursday 07 September 2006 15:56, Florian Lindner wrote:
> I terminated it at this point. At the end it gets very slow, about one link
> every two seconds, but it seems to work.
It should take about 30-45 minutes to complete. The warnings should get less,
but the internal server error indicate
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 08 September 2006 03:13, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
i have a small problem using pydoc to look at the Zope3 source, namely
zope.proxy and modules where zope.proxy is included:
Why would you use pydoc? Any conventional documentation tools are useless in
Zope
On Friday 08 September 2006 09:03, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Of course, that'd take a lot of resources (which we aren't likely to
> have) and it always sems a good idea to at least *allow* third party
> software to work with Zope.
The API in apidoc is developed in a way that it supports o
Hi Stephan!
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 08 September 2006 04:12, yuppie wrote:
Are there good reasons why these changes were not backported?
I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's
no general solution for keeping the current stable branch maintained.
The
On Friday 08 September 2006 10:15, yuppie wrote:
> Anyway. Should I just go ahead with backporting fixes or should I wait
> until a procedure and responsible person are found?
I think think it would be great, if you do the backports.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B
Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
Anyway, using the right paths i get back to where i initially started:
the package information is not displayed for several packages
pydoc displays package information on zope.proxy, zope.component,
zope.interface for example like this:
-
Help on package zope
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Friday 08 September 2006 09:03, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Of course, that'd take a lot of resources (which we aren't likely to
have) and it always sems a good idea to at least *allow* third party
software to work with Zope.
The API in apidoc is developed in a w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Friday 08 September 2006 04:12, yuppie wrote:
>> Are there good reasons why these changes were not backported?
>>
>> I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's
>> no general solution for keeping t
--On 8. September 2006 14:13:05 -0400 Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
When you check in a bug fix, you almost always need to:
* Check in the fix on the current release branch
branches(!). For Zope 2 we actually maintain 2.10, 2.9 and still a bit 2.8.
-aj
pgp2jdg3pXfMa.pgp
D
Hi,
What is the preferred way to check type in Zope 3.
I got lots of output for these two commands:
$ find . -name "*.py"|xargs grep "from types"
$ find . -name "*.py"|xargs grep "import types"
In some places type(module) is used. See this patch, a single
-1 is enough for me to not commit it
33 matches
Mail list logo
