Andrew Milton wrote:
> +---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]--
> | Andrew Milton wrote:
> | > +---[ Stephan Richter ]--
> | > | Hello everyone,
> | > |
> | > | With the development of Zope 3, the Zope developers committed to a new
> | > | development pr
Andrew Milton wrote:
> +---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]--
> |
> | Handing over ownership to the ZF and therefore having signed a
> | Contributor Agreement are the terms of the svn.zope.org repository, just
> | like that code is to be made ZPL.
>
> The license part is irre
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>Andrew Milton wrote:
>
>
>>+---[ Stephan Richter ]--
>>| Hello everyone,
>>|
>>| With the development of Zope 3, the Zope developers committed to a new
>>| development process and higher software quality guidelines. With the
>>adoption
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 04:31:03PM -0500, Stephan Richter wrote:
Hi Stephan,
This seems to me a great step forward but I am missing something.
The quality is measured by a number of metrics, but it seems nowhere is
actually measured if the software does what it is supposed to do, if it is
clear
Andrew Milton wrote:
> +---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]--
> |
> | > | * putting a project/package under the wings of the ZF ensures long-term
> | > | IP protection
> | >
> | > How? I think my death + 70 years is further away than the death of ZF, or
> in
> | > fact the de
On Monday 20 February 2006 19:24, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> My immediate concern is about resources: Who will have the time or
> incentive to police the common repository and grant certification? It
> seems to be a non-trivial process that may end up being quite
> time-consuming. It may be perceived a
On Monday 20 February 2006 20:09, Andrew Milton wrote:
> So in order to even get your Open Source package LISTED, you have to sign
> over the rights of your code to Zope Corp (currently, Zope Foundation
> later), and then check it into the svn respository.
>
> Is this is correct?
NO! ABSOLUTELY NO
On Monday 20 February 2006 23:16, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> No. The common repository under the wings of ZC/ZF is just *a*
> repository that implements the ZSCP. There can be others, for example
> the Plone repository, the collective repository (perhaps), etc.
Correct.
> I had earlier su
Hi all,
I've been developing an app, and I keep running into this problem.
Briefly, the object view loaded in my page will be one step out of
sync with a change I make on the object. This seems to be something
very basic that I am missing, but I have not been able to find an
appropriate fix and
Hi all,
Recently, I've been doing some thinking about cool ways to introduce a
Python programmer to Zope3. Baiju has done a great job with his
bookmarker app in his "Zope3 in 30 Minutes". The upside (and what was
it was designed for) is simplicity, but it's not especially useful or
"cool" past t
On Monday 20 February 2006 21:32, Brett Haydon wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Certification would go some way to separating mature projects from those in
> their infancy, but in my mind what the existing Plone/Zope product
> repositories lack most is a mechanism for user feedback.
>
> I would like to see:
On Monday 20 February 2006 23:55, Andrew Milton wrote:
Wow, you took the following two quotes out of context.
>
> The Common Repository is *not* a replacement for other high-level
> repositories like Plone's or ECM's. It does not aim at assimilating
> everything in the wider Zope community. It is
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 03:57, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Putting stuff into svn.zope.org *does* have advantages:
>
> * it's easy to feed packages upstream to Zope for a later inclusion into
> a Zope distribution.
>
> * putting a project/package under the wings of the ZF ensures long-te
Okay, this discussion is off-topic. I will not respond to it, unless I read
about something that relates directly to the proposal.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
__
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 05:13, Andrew Milton wrote:
> Why should Mark Shuttleworth who has plenty of means, hand over IP for
> (parts of) SchoolTool? I'm sure he has more than enough ways to protect his
> IP. Or are you saying that it makes sense for ZF/ZC to protect him?
The reason the School
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 05:30, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Anyways, you're welcome to contribute code to the z3base if you'd prefer
> a public repository that doesn't require IP handover/sharing. Who knows,
> perhaps we'll even manage to implement the ZSCP for some packages there :).
Th
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 07:15, Andrew Milton wrote:
> The proposal currently requires 3rd party code to be handed over to Zope
> Foundation[1] AND checked into the ZF svn repository in order to be
> 'certified'. You indicated this was indeed the case.
That's not true. Phillip and I both negate
OK, so it is now clear from Stephans comments that thsi really is two
separate proposals, just mixed into one file because of Stephans
workload. I think we should properly split them up, because this
clearly made a lot of people confused, and I wonder if anybody that
read this proposal realized tha
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 08:47, whit wrote:
> what hopefully zscp would do is allow a code commons at one end (ala
> collective, easy entry, friendly to experimentation) and a fully
> certified set of components at the other.
>
> In between, there would be well defined process for how software m
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 05:38, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
> However, I believe like you Philipp, that both initiatives should be
> decoupled.
The two things are decoupled as section 2 does not require section 3. I
decided to leave it in the same document for several reasons:
(1) Bandwidth. Dis
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 05:59, Reinoud van Leeuwen wrote:
> This seems to me a great step forward but I am missing something.
> The quality is measured by a number of metrics, but it seems nowhere is
> actually measured if the software does what it is supposed to do, if it is
> clear how it wor
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 Tuesday 21 February 2006 09:48, Chris McDonough wrote:
> 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
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
I presume, this is what you want:
class Recipe(Persistent):
def __init__(self):
self.creation_date = datetime.datetime.now()
Thanks for the reply.
That's the idea, but it works only if I don't add creation_field to the
add view:
When
Stephan Richter wrote:
>(2) I fear that the ZSCP would be talked to death and stay dead. My experience
>in the Open Source world has shown that if something does not have
>practicality, it dies unless someone is getting paid. I am certainly not
>getting paid for this. By biggest interest here i
On 2/20/06, David Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've implemented the browser:form ZCML directive. The implementation works
> well until I add an __init__ method to my view class. The following error
> is generated.
> File
> "/home/myuser/Zope-3.2.0/build/lib.linux-i686-2.4/zope/app/form/b
Does anyone have a trivial example?
Can ZSQL methods reside on the filesystem or are they currently TTW only?
Is there any working ODBC access yet?
I know that ZODB is the preferred database for many people, but,
I need to access data from non-Zope based applications.
TIA
jim penny
___
I've been able to do some basic things, depending upon what you're looking
for. I'm still exploring the best methods. So far I've found I have to do
everything on the file system. I'm still playing but I'm close mastering
the basic database operations.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMA
Hello,
I'm having an install problem for Zope 3.2.0, and I would appreciate
any help you can offer!
I'm running FreeBSD 6 and I had Z3 installed. Everything was wonderful :)
My friend recompiled most of the system, and this apparently involved
an update to most of ports, including sax, and pytho
Thanks. I will look into formlib. My goals is to be able to provide forms
that allow editing of SQL based database entries. I am exploring SQL and
Zope integration, and I liked the simplicity of the browser:form concept.
Here is what I am generally trying to do. Imagine a database of contacts.
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 18:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Can ZSQL methods reside on the filesystem or are they currently TTW only?
Of course you can also use ZSQL methods or just the Zope Database adapter API
from filesystem code.
> Is there any working ODBC access yet?
I am not sure anyon
After looking into formlib, this really looks great! Thanks for the help.
When I use it I see references to the "action" field. Are you familiar with
this? There is some documentation in FormBase as you suggested, but does my
errors refer to "action.submitted" which I'm having trouble finding.
> F
Never mind - I found it in zope.formlib.interfaces.IAction.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of David Johnson
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:56 PM
> To: 'Jeff Shell'
> Cc: zope3-users@zope.org
> Subject: RE: [Zope3-Users] browser:fo
On 2/21/06, David Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks. I will look into formlib. My goals is to be able to provide forms
> that allow editing of SQL based database entries. I am exploring SQL and
> Zope integration, and I liked the simplicity of the browser:form concept.
You'll (most lik
34 matches
Mail list logo
