--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to pylons...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-devel...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-devel?hl=en.
I think this is actually an independent issue related to the following
(from the CHANGES.txt of Pyramid 1.2.X):
- It may be necessary to more strictly order configuration route and
view statements when using an "autocommitting" Configurator. In the
past, it was possible to add a view which named a route name before
adding a route with that name when you used an autocommitting
configurator. For example::
config = Configurator(autocommit=True)
config.add_view('my.pkg.someview', route_name='foo')
config.add_route('foo', '/foo')
The above will raise an exception when the view attempts to add
itself. Now you must add the route before adding the view::
config = Configurator(autocommit=True)
config.add_route('foo', '/foo')
config.add_view('my.pkg.someview', route_name='foo')
This won't effect "normal" users, only people who have legacy BFG
codebases that used an autommitting configurator and possibly tests
that use the configurator API (the configurator returned by
``pyramid.testing.setUp`` is an autocommitting configurator). The
right way to get around this is to use a non-autocommitting
configurator (the default), which does not have these directive
ordering requirements.
Note that if you're still doing "from pyramid.configuration import
Configurator", that is a autocommitting Configurator. Change that to
"from pyramid.config import Configurator" if so.
- C