Would you be willing to share your code, particularly your published
application and the ZCML to configure Zope 3 to not use the default
publication stuff? I'm curious as to how people are doing this.
- C
On Oct 31, 2007, at 2:32 PM, Kapil Thangavelu wrote:
I've been using zope3 as a wsgi
Note that one micro-optimization for PUT requests is to not use a
FieldStorage at all because the body is never mime-encoded anyway in
practice.
I have a monkey patch to do this now, which I turned into a patch for
the core, but took out because Phillipp whined at a sprint once. ;-)
Here
On Dec 22, 2006, at 5:55 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
Chris McDonough's 'supervisor' is a Python-based implementation of the
same basic idea, with even more generality: the 'supervisord'
process,
for instance, can be controlled from a remote host.
http://plope.com/software/supervisor/
That s
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:21 PM, Jake wrote:
I think it is a huge mistake to lose Zope branding. After years of
building up momentum behind a project, to head off into some
strange developer code speak is just going to lose people who are
not intimately involved.
The world, after many years,
My $.02: I suspect it might be better to just use XML than
configparser as a ZConfig replacement. The config format is a
stretch under CP due to the lack of hierarchy. I'm beginning to
think the "don't make admins use XML" argument should die. Everybody
knows how to edit XML nowadays, a
On Mar 5, 2006, at 11:34 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
My main point is that we need to consider each of these audiences, as
they have separate concerns. We need to be explicit about this and
have messages and technical solutions tailored to each audience.
Do we? Messages, perhaps, but we should a
On Mar 3, 2006, at 3:08 AM, Max M wrote:
Splitting up Zope to let people use seperate pieces of Zope aka Zed
is not a valid reason. Good software practise is a valid reason.
But catering for those few developers that wants to use just a few
pieces is probably not worth the effort.
Here's o
On Mar 1, 2006, at 11:31 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
[...] the process of identifying
dependencies and eliminating the silly ones is the valuable work
here, and it seems to be getting done by embracing egg packaging,
which is really wonderful.
Such a gushing
I think packaging efforts are really the key to being able to tell a
story like this. The efforts happen to be couched in a process of
converting z3 packages into eggs, but really the process of
identifying dependencies and eliminating the silly ones is the
valuable work here, and it seems
I hate to cross-post this, but would it be possible to limit this
discussion to a single list (e.g. zope3-dev, maybe)? I'm interested
in this topic, but my mail client isn't smart enough to filter it out
to only one place and I'm sure there are a lot of other people with
the same issue.
On Feb 15, 2006, at 11:52 PM, Jeff Shell wrote:
A Zope that was basically zope.publisher, zope.component,
zope.interface, zope.schema, and tal/tales (and maybe 'transaction')
would be ideal.
+1
I guess this is all kindof rambling. I just don't see any benefit to
me. I'd rather see any effor
On Feb 11, 2006, at 9:24 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
I'm told that the ZODB is the de-facto way of storing content.
Maybe soon the default may be a filesystem. Mmm...
My feelings are that there should be a "classic" Zope 3 release which
is exactly what exists now (it should make the assumption
FWIW, I'd be keen on seeing a bobolike Zope 3 derivation that
included none or very little of zope.app, but that allowed you to
configure an instance to publish a single arbitrary root object but
assumed nothing else. I think the "filesystem traverser" root object
could be one kind of root
BTW, how impending is "impending"? Days, weeks, months? Anybody know?
On Feb 6, 2006, at 8:40 AM, Benji York wrote:
My first thought is to consider how the impending charter of the
Zope Foundation influences things.
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Z
I'm +1 for deprecating python: expressions in the context of views.
But I'm not sure what "deprecate" would mean; I doubt they can go
away entirely given the body of code that exists which uses them.
An interesting thing about python: expressions... I've found that
simple "python: foo['ba
On Dec 26, 2005, at 8:51 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
FWIW, It would be nice to have some API to return large amounts
of content which doesn't live in ZODB without returning an
*actual* file object. A real world use case: In a Zope2
application, I depend on being
FWIW, It would be nice to have some API to return large amounts of
content which doesn't live in ZODB without returning an *actual* file
object. A real world use case: In a Zope2 application, I depend on
being able to return a "streamiterator" which does decryption as it
streams. I canno
On Nov 24, 2005, at 6:42 AM, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday 24 November 2005 01:39, Chris McDonough wrote:
- There doesn't seem to be as much of a commitment in the
Z3 community to backwards compatibility as
there is for Z2. Notes like Stephan's last one where
he says &q
On Nov 24, 2005, at 8:37 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
I recall a slightly different discussion I was involved in. I
remember Zope 2 core developers worrying about the inclusion of
Five in Zope 2.8; they were worried they'd need to maintain its
codebase.
I was one of these people. Since the
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 04:56 +0100, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> I think Martin Aspeli is not the only one who still has no clue on how to
> move forward
> beyond a certain Fivization of his Zope 2 products. If you do, then that's
> great, but I
> don't think everyone is in that fortunate si
FYI (this is mostly for the benefit of the Five folks), I've created a
Zope 2.9 branch from the trunk as of about 10 minutes ago. This branch
is frozen for feature work; it may need some changing of externals to
reflect what we want the initial version of Zope 3 that we want 2.9 to
ship with. I d
On Sun, 2005-04-03 at 21:30, Tim Peters wrote:
> [Chris McDonough]
> > Where *was* this set_trace? I have a suspicion I'm missing some checkin
> > notifications; I don't see any messages that show it getting fixed in
> > zope-checkins or zope-cvs (neither
Where *was* this set_trace? I have a suspicion I'm missing some checkin
notifications; I don't see any messages that show it getting fixed in
zope-checkins or zope-cvs (neither in my incoming mail nor in the
archives). I actually just wanted to make sure I didn't do it ;-)
On Sun, 2005-04-03 at
23 matches
Mail list logo
