Jim Fulton wrote:
Any objections?
This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving
zope3 developers to the zope-dev list.
+1 from me :-)
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 10/4/07, Michael R. Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving
zope3 developers to the zope-dev list.
+1
+1
What about retiring #zope3-dev IRC channel and only using #zope ?
No. #zope is roughly the
On 10/4/07, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, on the subject of renaming things: Calling it zope-devel or
similar may not be ideal, since people who develop with Zope (don't we
all?) assume this is for any developers, not just core developers.
Something like zope-general and
On 10/4/07, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I though of that. Historically, the #zope channel was much chattier,
which makes it hard for me to deal with. When #zope3-dev was set up,
I asked that people keep the noise level down, which has made it much
more useful, imo.
Maybe we should
like using fastcgi+paste+zope3?
--
_\|/_
(O-O)
--oOO-(_)-OOo
Hector Miuler Malpica Gallegos
Universidad Nacional del Callao - Peru
Escuela de Ingenieria Electronica
usuario registrado #308608
___
Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 09:44:21PM +0200, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I'd really like to get to closure on the current approved release process.
Philipp, would you mind separating the release process into a separate
file? Or do you mind if I do
Meant to send this to the list...
On 9/18/07, Christian Zagrodnick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only thing is, no I'm not going to register every file in ZCML. I
want to use the zc.resourcelibrary.
The follwoing makes it possible, but it's not too nice to have that
somewhere in the code:
On 2007-10-01 21:41:36 +0200, Philipp von Weitershausen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Christian Theune wrote:
Zagy and I are trying to make z3c.form compatible with sources.
Shrug... Why wouldn't it be compatible already? Shouldn't the widget
abstract everything away?
We had to investigate
Jim Fulton wrote:
There's work going on to create a second version of WSGI. Last time, we
didn't pay much attention until WSGI was a done deal. This time, I
think it would be better if we were involved earlier. Unfortunately, I
don't have time to pay attention. Does anyone else?
I
Hi there,
zope.error is a 3.5 egg, but is needed by 3.4.x releases. I guess this
also happened because large package refactorings happened and were
released as 3.4.x releases. It's pretty bizarre to run into, though.
Regards,
Martijn
___
On 10/5/07, Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
zope.error is a 3.5 egg, but is needed by 3.4.x releases. I guess this
also happened because large package refactorings happened and were
released as 3.4.x releases. It's pretty bizarre to run into, though.
It's only bizarre if the satellite
On 10/5/07, Fred Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/5/07, Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
zope.error is a 3.5 egg, but is needed by 3.4.x releases. I guess this
also happened because large package refactorings happened and were
released as 3.4.x releases. It's pretty bizarre to
On Oct 5, 2007, at 12:07 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
zope.error is a 3.5 egg, but is needed by 3.4.x releases. I guess
this also happened because large package refactorings happened and
were released as 3.4.x releases. It's pretty bizarre to run into,
though.
The satellite
Fred Drake wrote:
On 10/5/07, Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
zope.error is a 3.5 egg, but is needed by 3.4.x releases. I guess this
also happened because large package refactorings happened and were
released as 3.4.x releases. It's pretty bizarre to run into, though.
It's only
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Oct 5, 2007, at 12:07 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
zope.error is a 3.5 egg, but is needed by 3.4.x releases. I guess this
also happened because large package refactorings happened and were
released as 3.4.x releases. It's pretty bizarre to run into, though.
On Oct 5, 2007, at 1:59 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Oct 5, 2007, at 12:07 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
zope.error is a 3.5 egg, but is needed by 3.4.x releases. I guess
this also happened because large package refactorings happened
and were released as 3.4.x
I discussed this a bit this afternoon with Stephan and we came up
with an idea that we think might help. Stephan is going to try to
prototype it. I'll try to explain it.
The basic idea is to provide a custom index. There will be such an
index for each known good set (KGS). An example
On Oct 5, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
...
Grok will pick up the balls Zope 3 dropped here.
Hm. I didn't think Zope 3 was animate. Who are you referring to?
We actually care about a Grok version as it's the main way to get
people to actually use Zope 3 stuff.
We noticed this
Betreff: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and
zope-dev lists
Any objections?
This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving
zope3 developers to the zope-dev list.
-1
Not that I'm not interested in what's going on in Zope 2,
but the two list let me
On Friday 05 October 2007 14:49, Jim Fulton wrote:
I discussed this a bit this afternoon with Stephan and we came up
with an idea that we think might help. Stephan is going to try to
prototype it. I'll try to explain it
Hi everyone,
the first version of the tools required to develop
Stephan Richter wrote:
2. How many packages should be controlled in this index? I think we should
definitely add packages from z3c and the zc namespace.
What is the motivation to include non-controlled packages? I suppose it
is to let people use those packages with (in this case) Zope 3.4.
On Friday 05 October 2007 22:45, Benji York wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
2. How many packages should be controlled in this index? I think we
should definitely add packages from z3c and the zc namespace.
What is the motivation to include non-controlled packages?
Jim mentioned that
--On 6. Oktober 2007 03:16:53 +0200 Roger Ineichen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Betreff: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and
zope-dev lists
Any objections?
This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving
zope3 developers to the zope-dev list.
-1
Not that I'm
23 matches
Mail list logo
