December 2005 - Zope-Dev

Logging of ConflictError
by Florent Guillaume 02 Feb '06

02 Feb '06

I've improved the logging of ConflictError in Zope 2.9 and trunk. http://svn.zope.org/?rev=40454&view=rev Now you'll get two things: - logs at level BLATHER for each conflict, but it may be retried - log at level ERROR when the conflict can't be retried anymore and is returned to the browser as an error. I removed the log at level INFO because it is very misleading for system administrators in my experience. Do people want this also for 2.8? Note that it changes the log format, so may break third party tools that parse logs. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of R&D +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com fg(a)nuxeo.com

9 31

[ZPublisher] specifiying 'charset' for the content-type header
by Andreas Jung 23 Jan '06

23 Jan '06

The following usecase is not handled correctly by Zope: When you call a PythonScript returning a Python unicode string then the ZPublisher/HTTPResponse code will convert the unicode response string using HTTPResponse.default_encoding to a Python string. The default encoding is configurable through zope.conf (zpublisher_default_encoding key). This works fine unless you change the encoding to utf-8. In this case Zope sends out UTF8 content without specifying the encoding in the content-type header. I propose the following changes: - Zope adds content-type: text/plain|html when no content-type is specified by the application. In this case we would add 'charset=<DEFAULT_ENCODING> - if the application specfies a content-type header then we would add the charset only if it is undefined Objections? Andreas

2 11

Zope tests: 8 OK
by Zope tests summarizer 31 Dec '05

31 Dec '05

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Fri Dec 30 12:01:01 2005 UTC to Sat Dec 31 12:01:01 2005 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Unit Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.1.3 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Fri Dec 30 21:03:32 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003890.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Fri Dec 30 21:05:02 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003891.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Fri Dec 30 21:06:32 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003892.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Fri Dec 30 21:08:02 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003893.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Fri Dec 30 21:09:32 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003894.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Fri Dec 30 21:11:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003895.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_9-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Fri Dec 30 21:12:33 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003896.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Fri Dec 30 21:14:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003897.html

1 0

Zope tests: 8 OK
by Zope tests summarizer 30 Dec '05

30 Dec '05

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Thu Dec 29 12:01:01 2005 UTC to Fri Dec 30 12:01:01 2005 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Unit Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.1.3 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 29 21:02:32 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003882.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 29 21:04:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003883.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 29 21:05:33 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003884.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 29 21:07:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003885.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 29 21:08:33 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003886.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 29 21:10:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003887.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_9-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 29 21:11:33 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003888.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 29 21:13:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003889.html

2 1

Curious about age old WebDAV decisions...
by Zachery Bir 29 Dec '05

29 Dec '05

I've got a Folder (indirection) and a DTML Method (found) in the root of a Zope site. HEAD requests fail on the indirected DTML Method due to OFS.ObjectManager's __getitem__ method: def __getitem__(self, key): import pdb;pdb.set_trace() v=self._getOb(key, None) if v is not None: return v if hasattr(self, 'REQUEST'): request=self.REQUEST method=request.get('REQUEST_METHOD', 'GET') if request.maybe_webdav_client and not method in ('GET', 'POST'): return NullResource(self, key, request).__of__(self) raise KeyError, key I wasn't around during the development of the WebDAV code, so I'm loathe to just jump in and start changing things, but why isn't 'HEAD' exempted from the NullResource as well, given that HTTP specs state that HEAD *must* return the same headers that a GET would provide (ignoring for the moment the Collector issue thread over whether HEAD should provide the length of the source of a document or its fully rendered content - let's just try to make sure both methods work on the *same object*). What was the reasoning behind the decision? These changes happened way back in the Dark Ages (late March 1999 or so, earlier in the month, this code was added to OFS.Folder with the initial WebDAV support). A trip through the WayBackMachine™ shows no discussion in the Zope-dev lists in early 1999 when this was being worked on, and no real mention of WebDAV in Zope for most of the rest of that year (on Zope-dev or the general Zope list). Am I mistaking this for a problem? ~ zbir@gorilla $ curl http://localhost:2277/found hello~ zbir@gorilla $ curl http://localhost:2277/indirection/found hello~ zbir@gorilla $ curl -I http://localhost:2277/found HTTP/1.1 200 OK Server: Apache Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:59:58 GMT Last-Modified: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:54:07 GMT Accept-Ranges: none Content-Type: text/html Content-Length: 5 ~ zbir@gorilla $ curl -I http://localhost:2277/indirection/found HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found Server: Apache Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 19:00:10 GMT Bobo-Exception-Line: 63 Content-Length: 891 Bobo-Exception-Value: See the server error log for details Content-Type: text/html Accept-Ranges: none Bobo-Exception-File: NullResource.py Bobo-Exception-Type: NotFound Thanks, Zac

3 2

RE: [ZODB-Dev] Re: Connection pool makes no sense
by Tim Peters 29 Dec '05

29 Dec '05

[Pitcher(a)gw.tander.ru] >>> Not agree. Can you answer the question? Does self.all.remove(c) mean >>> that we WANT to destroy connection instance? [Tim Peters] >> It means that _ConnectionPool no longer has a reason to remember >> anything about that Connection. Application code can continue >> keeping it alive forever, though. [Denis Markov] > But what about RDB-Connection what stay in cache forever? Sorry, I don't know anything about how your app uses RDB connections. ZODB isn't creating them on its own ;-) > On the next peak load we get some next ZODB-Connections with > RDB-Connection .... After repush() old ZODB-Connections will be killed > (if > pool_size) I don't like the word "killed" here, because it seems highly misleading. ZODB doesn't destroy any Connections or any caches. ZODB destroys all its strong references to old Connections, and that's all. Nothing can be done to _force_ Connections to go away forever. It's ZODB's job here to make sure it isn't forcing Connections (beyond the pool_size limit) to stay alive, and it's doing that job. It can't "kill" Connections. > but RDB-Connection stay in cache forever > And so on.... There's one cache per Connection. If and when a Connection goes away, its cache goes away too. So when you say something "stays in cache forever", I don't know what you mean -- you apparently have many (hundreds? thousands?) of Connections, in which case you also have many (hundreds or thousands) of caches. I don't know how an RDB-Connection gets into even one of those caches to begin with. > as a result we get many RDB-Connections what will never use but hang our > RDB At this point I have to hope that someone else here understands what you're doing. If not, you may have better luck on the zope-db list (which is devoted to using other databases with Zope): http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-db

2 1

Zope tests: 8 OK
by Zope tests summarizer 29 Dec '05

29 Dec '05

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Dec 28 12:01:01 2005 UTC to Thu Dec 29 12:01:01 2005 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Unit Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.1.3 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 28 21:04:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003874.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 28 21:05:33 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003875.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 28 21:07:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003876.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 28 21:08:33 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003877.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 28 21:10:03 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003878.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 28 21:11:34 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003879.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_9-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 28 21:13:04 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003880.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 28 21:14:34 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003881.html

1 0

Re: [ANN] Zope 2.9.0 beta 2 released
by Tres Seaver 28 Dec '05

28 Dec '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Andreas Jung wrote: > on behalf of Zope Corporation and the Zope community I am pleased to > announce the release of Zope 2.9.0 beta 2 (the x-mas release) Thanks for continuing to do these releases. In this case, I think we jumped the gun, because the Z2 branch left the Zope3 svn:externals set to a non-tagged release of Zope3. We need to get Z3 released *first*, before we make the Z2 release which includes / depends on it. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 tseaver(a)palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDsEkz+gerLs4ltQ4RAswhAKDCaJFpA70UFAeEvKZDETyqxk/2EACgxhUh 2CiGkGYGlpdbK4Z145dTKcE= =eGb9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Zope tests: 8 OK
by Zope tests summarizer 28 Dec '05

28 Dec '05

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Tue Dec 27 12:01:01 2005 UTC to Wed Dec 28 12:01:01 2005 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Unit Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.1.3 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Dec 27 21:02:15 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003866.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Dec 27 21:03:46 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003867.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Dec 27 21:05:16 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003868.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Dec 27 21:06:46 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003869.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Dec 27 21:08:16 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003870.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Dec 27 21:09:46 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003871.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_9-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Dec 27 21:11:16 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003872.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Dec 27 21:12:46 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003873.html

1 0

Directory structure on svn.zope.org
by Andreas Jung 28 Dec '05

28 Dec '05

The top-level directory structure on svn.zope.org appears a bit messy to me. There we have the folders for the "large" projects CMF, Zope, Zope3 and lots modules that possibly don't belong there. Wouldn't it make sense to move them into a dedicated Zope3-modules folder (or choose another name)? Andreas

6 7