http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3703 <pre> On May 9, 2012, at 2:24 PM, Elizabeth Leddy wrote: It's currently at https://github.com/plone/plone.app.users/blob/plip10959/plone/app/users/tests/plugins.txt ---------- David Glick Web Developer davidglick-jwYafjbudsc+uJoB2kUjGw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org 206.286.1235x32 Are you engaging? Find out! Use our free engagement benchmarking tool. http://groundwire.org/labs/engagement-strategy/diy-benchmarking-survey </pre> David Glick (GW 2012-05-09T21:39:40 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3702 <pre> On May 8, 2012, at 4:36 PM, David Glick wrote: For me, the test case and upgrade steps should definitely be handled. I'm more concerned about the documentation as a test case than anything (I can't find it anymore actually...). I *think* this should be in the community dev manual. Liz </pre> Elizabeth Leddy 2012-05-09T21:24:34 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3701 <pre>Hey Dylan. I'm sorry we've been dropping the ball on your PLIP since Ross stepped down from being its champion. (In the case of today's meeting, we accidentally overlooked a section of our spreadsheet which included this PLIP.) I just familiarized myself with the code, past reviews and conversation, and my personal feeling is that this is a good change and while there are reasonable concerns raised in the reviews, we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. To touch on some of the specific items that were outstanding in the reviews: * Yiorgis raised the issue of the initial generated password not necessarily being compliant with the validation, but you pointed out that this is not a problem because the user never sees the initial password. That makes sense to me, so I think this concern is resolved. * Yiorgis and Ross both raised concerns about whether the PAS API should be extended (to support limits on password age, say, or to support providing more specific help text for the passwo</pre> David Glick 2012-05-08T23:36:02 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3700 <pre>May 8 Framework team meeting Present: Eric Steele, Alec Mitchell, David Glick, Liz Leddy; Absent: Craig Haynal, Ross Patterson, Martijn Pieters, Laurence Rowe, Rob Gietema. - There has a been a pattern of the European team members missing meetings as of late. Do we need to reschedule the call for a better time? Is it time to issue a call for new team members and ask inactive ones to step down? - Plone 4.2 update: Eric is releasing rc1 today! - With the finalization of Plone 4.2, we have set cutoff dates for Plone 4.3 PLIPs: 1. Implementations should be done by May 31. 2. Reviews and merging should be done by June 11. 3. PLIPs not meeting these deadlines will be considered for 4.4. - PLIP 12235 (batching): Merged. - PLIP 11773 (Dexterity): Merged. - PLIP 11838 (z3c.form portlets): Still ready for merge. - PLIP 12110 (ignoring accents in search): Still ready for merge. - PLIP 12227 (theme editor): A group from UCLA has volunteered to help review it. Martin is finishing tweaks. - PLIP 12266 (css</pre> David Glick 2012-05-08T18:40:20 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3699 <pre>There wound up being multiple occurrences of our call in Calliflower. I've deleted the duplicates (which is why you've all received a cancellation message or 5). Call is happening today, normal time. Eric </pre> Eric Steele 2012-05-08T16:32:44 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3698 <pre>Hi team, this is your friendly nudge to attend to your action items before our next meeting (which I believe is this Tues. May 8, although it's not showing up on my calendar...) best, David -------- Original Message -------- Subject: minutes of Plone framework team meeting, April 24 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:10:17 -0700 From: David Glick &lt;davidglick-jwYafjbudsc+uJoB2kUjGw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt;&lt;mailto:davidglick&lt; at &gt;groundwire.org&gt; To: Plone Developers &lt;plone-developers-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt;&lt;mailto:plone-developers-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt; April 24, 2012 – Framework Team Meeting Attending: Eric Steele, David Glick, Ross Patterson, Alec Mitchell, Craig Haynal, Laurence Rowe, Liz Leddy - PLIP 11965 (ResourceRegistries resource bundles): Eric merged for 4.2. Clearing up test failures introduced. - PLIP 8699 (Published date): framework team has no concerns, go ahead with implementation. - Discussion on lists re theme control panels: Agreement </pre> David Glick 2012-05-06T21:05:19 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3695 <pre>Hi all, I've started Plone Portraits PAS plugin work a long time ago and also created a PLIP proposal (which has been closed because of PLIP policy change - https://dev.plone.org/ticket/11323 ) It is slightly different what Jens is suggesting. It defines new PAS plugin and allows to use eg. Gravatar or LDAP. The plugin is backward comaptible with the current implementation, because implements ZODBPortraitProvider plugin. The current implementation is available on https://github.com/naro/Products.PlonePAS The example plugins are Memberdata https://github.com/naro/Products.PlonePAS/blob/master/Products/PlonePAS/plugins/portraits.py or Gravatar https://github.com/naro/Products.PlonePAS/blob/master/Products/PlonePAS/plugins/gravatar_portrait.py or read-only LDAP https://github.com/naro/Products.PlonePAS/blob/master/Products/PlonePAS/plugins/portrait_ldap_demo.py </pre> Radim Novotny 2012-05-02T15:32:18 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3694 <pre>April 24, 2012 – Framework Team Meeting Attending: Eric Steele, David Glick, Ross Patterson, Alec Mitchell, Craig Haynal, Laurence Rowe, Liz Leddy - PLIP 11965 (ResourceRegistries resource bundles): Eric merged for 4.2. Clearing up test failures introduced. - PLIP 8699 (Published date): framework team has no concerns, go ahead with implementation. - Discussion on lists re theme control panels: Agreement that having 2 control panels is non-ideal, but not sure best way to resolve. Suggestions welcome. - PLIP 12844 (Switch to new version of TinyMCE): Approved for core. Next step is review of implementation. davisagli is champion, eleddy will also review. - Jens Klein's proposal about handling portraits via property sheets. Liz will follow up to get him to submit a PLIP - PLIP 10886 (new event type): still in progress, may not be ready for 4.3. - PLIP 12110 (plain text searches ignore accents): ready for merge. - PLIP 10959 (API for password validation policy) and 12521 (Customizable password </pre> David Glick 2012-04-24T19:03:33 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3693 <pre>Since this one is relatively minor and has been done for some time, I've made the executive decision to just include it in Plone 4.2. (Doing so allows me to clear up some HTML 5 that snuck into the 4.1 branch) So it's completely on me if I've gone and blown everything up. Eric </pre> Eric Steele 2012-04-19T00:47:28 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3692 <pre> On Apr 11, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Jens W. Klein wrote: I would like this but, how would this work? How does the PAS story fit in here? I'm all for this idea. I feel like a plip would just help with the review process more than anything. I wouldn't mind deprecating the old way either and making a plip would help this happen. I doubt the FWT would say no to this and I know I have a project that could use this functionality. Liz </pre> Elizabeth Leddy 2012-04-12T17:52:58 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3691 <pre>On 4/1/12 4:04 PM, Eric Steele wrote: So now that we've got plone.app.collection in 4.2, how do we want to handle collections portlets? We currently ship with plone.portlet.collection. plone.app.collection adds its own, largely the same (though missing some of the more recent features/fixes added to the other). Should the p.a.collection version be made the default (and updated for parity with p.portlet.collection) or should p.portlet.collection be updated to handle the newer collections (and remove the portlet functionality from p.a.collection)? Seems like the latter would be the simpler option. I made some progress toward supporting new-style collections in plone.portlet.collection (by adding a backward-compatible queryCatalog method to the collection class in plone.app.collection...really not too hard except for figuring out how to get non-IContentListing-wrapped results out of the query builder). Remaining tasks: - The code path for when the 'random order' option is selected is currently broken. To fi</pre> David Glick 2012-04-10T06:32:33 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3690 <pre>So now that we've got plone.app.collection in 4.2, how do we want to handle collections portlets? We currently ship with plone.portlet.collection. plone.app.collection adds its own, largely the same (though missing some of the more recent features/fixes added to the other). Should the p.a.collection version be made the default (and updated for parity with p.portlet.collection) or should p.portlet.collection be updated to handle the newer collections (and remove the portlet functionality from p.a.collection)? Seems like the latter would be the simpler option. I made some progress toward supporting new-style collections in plone.portlet.collection (by adding a backward-compatible queryCatalog method to the collection class in plone.app.collection...really not too hard except for figuring out how to get non-IContentListing-wrapped results out of the query builder). Remaining tasks: - The code path for when the 'random order' option is selected is currently broken. To fix it the BBB queryCatalog needs to acc</pre> David Glick 2012-04-09T06:00:38 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3689 <pre>So now that we've got plone.app.collection in 4.2, how do we want to handle collections portlets? We currently ship with plone.portlet.collection. plone.app.collection adds its own, largely the same (though missing some of the more recent features/fixes added to the other). Should the p.a.collection version be made the default (and updated for parity with p.portlet.collection) or should p.portlet.collection be updated to handle the newer collections (and remove the portlet functionality from p.a.collection)? Seems like the latter would be the simpler option. Eric </pre> Eric Steele 2012-04-01T23:04:33 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3688 <pre>Been meaning to do this for a while, but got a bit of a kick in the pants this week. Previous meeting minutes are at http://bit.ly/plonefwt. I'll make no guarantees of the quality of the notes taken, but some info is better than none. -- Eric March 27, 2012 – Framework Team MeetingAttending: Eric Steele, Ross Patterson, Elizabeth Leddy, Alec Mitchell, Craig Haynal Absent: Martijn Pieters, Rob Gietema, Laurence Rowe David Glick has offered to rejoin the FWT. All in favor. 4.2 blockers cleared. Eric is fixing some failing tests. RC1 this week, hopefully. Can we get minutes out to the developers? Yes. We’ll start today. #12452 (plone.app.jquery) merged into 4.2. #12350 (Integrate portions of jQuery UI) Portions (if not all) of this are integrated into the theme editor PLIP Any objections to this moving forward? None. #12776 (Remove kupu): Simple change, largely removed already. Would be good to pull out tools (link checker, etc) for general use. They’re handy, but this isn’t a requirement. 12110 (P</pre> Eric Steele 2012-03-27T18:48:28 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3684 <pre>H Denys, On 8 March 2012 09:38, Denys Mishunov &lt;denys.mishunov-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt; wrote: wrote: Awesome! I'm going to copy your review here and respond a bit - trac isn't very inclusive for this type of discussion. Create theme tab - When on "Create theme" tab it should allow me to upload the theme right there wihout switching tabs back and forth. This is important — the form doesn't allow me to create completely new theme from scratch so it has to allow me to upload a theme here. Great idea! Of course, this assumes some kind of pre-step where we build locally and then upload. I think that's one workflow. I think others, especially those mainly tinkering/playing with Plone, will want to do everything inside Plone. - Having some pre-installed themes out-of-the-box is confusing. I have no idea what are those. If you want to provide a demo theme it should be only one. Not 2. And should probably be renamed to something simple like "Demo theme". The idea is </pre> Martin Aspeli 2012-03-08T16:53:45 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3683 <pre>Hi, Ok, so some answers here. I still need to digest Denys' comments. First off, I think the mockup is great. :) On 8 March 2012 10:44, Ramon Navarro Bosch &lt;ramon.nb-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt; wrote: I think it makes sense to show it at the bottom. I am nervous about hiding it. The Diazo rules syntax is sufficiently flexible that any scheme to hide this could lead to unexpected behaviour, even broken themes, with little or no ability for the user to understand. Making it possible to build themes entirely through point-and-click is a laudable goal. However, it's going to need to be the next version of this, and Diazo itself will likely need to evolve somewhat for this to be possible in a safe way. The mapper is there to *help* you build the theme, not take away all need to understand Diazo. That's also why we put in the inline help. We could add this as text input, maybe, but I don't know how to make a UI for all the different types of conditions. It also gets complex because you'd often </pre> Martin Aspeli 2012-03-08T11:22:18 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3682 <pre>Hi, Thanks for this! Let me digest more fully in light of Denys' comments as well. One thing I wanted to say, however: The goal of this is not to completely hide the XML rules syntax. We want to help people write the rules file, but we are not, yet, mature enough to be able to make theming a fully point-and-click experience, and you need to be able to think about things like conditionals and sequence. If we hide the output, people will be confused when it doesn't work perfectly as they'd expected. I'm not sure if this was clear to the reviewers? Martin On 8 March 2012 10:44, Ramon Navarro Bosch &lt;ramon.nb-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt; wrote: </pre> Martin Aspeli 2012-03-08T11:13:48 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3681 <pre>I've shown it to our designers in order to recive feedback, they said to me : * It's now understable how the mapper works, the feeling that you can choose the elements on content and theme makes you feel that you can assign rules only saving the elements and is not easy to understand. * One suggestion they made is not showing the rules files by default, just show the new rules button, then the two screens of origin-theme , with the result at the end and a option of where you want to store the new rule ( a list of levels on the rule's xml so you decide to add it on the visual-wrapper, ... any other point. * The option to add the rule with conditional * On the new rule option should be a first option of which kind of rule, new static file, ... * There should be an option to see the rules file ( that is on the editor ) so people dont' get messed with it. I'm sending an image that as we say in catalan: it's more important a image than 1000 words Ramon On 8 March 2012 10:38, Denys Mishunov &lt;denys.mishu</pre> Ramon Navarro Bosch 2012-03-08T10:44:37 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3680 <pre> Sure, I was thinking about it myself (I know my textual descriptions can get really messy as well ;)) just didn't quite have time at 01:30AM :-P Will see what I can come up with today in the evening. Will try to so some Balsamiq mockups for the start </pre> Denys Mishunov 2012-03-08T09:38:13 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3678 <pre>Hello Martin, all On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Martin Aspeli &lt;optilude+lists-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt; wrote: I have submitted my UI review to the plip ticket. I am not sure whether I have had to add it somewhere in the buildout though, but I didn't find Rob's review anywhere on FS, only in the ticket so did the same. If the review should live somewhere else, please let me know and I will copy it there. </pre> Denys Mishunov 2012-03-08T08:52:20 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework/3677 <pre> That wasn't the point. All I'm saying is that we don't have anything equivalent in Plone that we can borrow UI from (apart from maybe in the ZMI). The content management UI is at best a partial fit. It needs to be functional and easy to understand. I'm not sure it needs to be consistent with the way you edit a content item. I don't disagree with any of those points. Note that Alex at least was involved in some of the decisions, and Nathan did a lot of the work on the file manager, so it's not like no-one has looked at it with a UI focus. I hope you will. :) See also the PLIP comments, where Rob has suggested some areas for improvement/concern. My main concerns are: - That we don't end up waiting "indefinitely" for some UI review/suggestions that then stops us from shipping something potentially useful. - That we don't end up with a list of subjective comments. Actionable and constructive criticism only, please. - That we don't demand 'perfection' if we can ship something that is 'good enough' to</pre> Martin Aspeli 2012-03-06T13:00:53 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.comp.web.zope.plone.teams.framework