Benji York [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
We don't want to *require* objects to provide ILocation.
I don't know what the right answer is here. I'll think about it. I'd
love some good suggestions.
Perhaps an ILocation adapter that would keep the __name__ and __parent__
Hi there,
We just noticed that some objects were not being cataloged correctly.
After a lot of debugging, we noticed the following:
The IntId utility wouldn't find the unique id for an object when a
modified event was sent. As a result, it wasn't being indexed.
We figured out that there
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
We just noticed that some objects were not being cataloged correctly.
After a lot of debugging, we noticed the following:
The IntId utility wouldn't find the unique id for an object when a
modified event was sent. As a result, it wasn't being indexed.
We
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
...
- Implement ILocation in your content objects. This is the simplest
course. It sounds like, for your application, the content objects
should know about their locations, since you want them to be able to
generate events that contain location
Roger Ineichen wrote:
Hi Martijn and Jim
Behalf Of Martijn Faassen
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 2:22 PM
To: zope3-dev (E-mail)
Subject: [Zope3-dev] interaction between LocationProxy and
IIntId utility
Hi there,
[..]
Finally with some help from Stephan Richter giving us the
clue
Jim Fulton wrote:
We don't want to *require* objects to provide ILocation.
I don't know what the right answer is here. I'll think about it. I'd
love some good suggestions.
Perhaps an ILocation adapter that would keep the __name__ and __parent__
information in a separate place (attribute
