December 2005 - Zope-Dev

KeyError: 'URL' in HTTPRequest using zope2.7-py2.3.3
by Brian Watson 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

hello all, i'm running into a wierd zope/plone error. it is the same error as the "RESPONSE eaten" post at: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2003-November/020952.html i asked the poster for help since there were no followups, but unfortunately he would not help me and told me he was not my personal helpdesk. these posters had a similar issue/solution: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2004-February/021793.html but i cannot find a similar culprit. any help would be much appreciated. below is my traceback. thanks a million, brian w. -------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "E:\NBCJEAP\Zope\lib\python\zExceptions\ExceptionFormatter.py", line 157, in formatLine result.extend(self.formatSupplement(supp, tb)) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Zope\lib\python\zExceptions\ExceptionFormatter.py", line 105, in formatSupplement extra = self.formatExtraInfo(supplement) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Zope\lib\python\zExceptions\ExceptionFormatter.py", line 231, in formatExtraInfo extra = getInfo(1) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Zope\lib\python\Products\PageTemplates\TALES.py", line 277, i n getInfo s = pprint.pformat(data) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Python\lib\pprint.py", line 58, in pformat return PrettyPrinter().pformat(object) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Python\lib\pprint.py", line 109, in pformat self._format(object, sio, 0, 0, {}, 0) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Python\lib\pprint.py", line 127, in _format rep = self._repr(object, context, level - 1) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Python\lib\pprint.py", line 191, in _repr self._depth, level) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Python\lib\pprint.py", line 203, in format return _safe_repr(object, context, maxlevels, level) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Python\lib\pprint.py", line 246, in _safe_repr vrepr, vreadable, vrecur = saferepr(v, context, maxlevels, level) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Python\lib\pprint.py", line 286, in _safe_repr rep = `object` File "E:\NBCJEAP\Zope\lib\python\ZPublisher\HTTPRequest.py", line 1295, in __r epr__ return "<%s, URL=%s>" % (self.__class__.__name__, self['URL']) File "E:\NBCJEAP\Zope\lib\python\ZPublisher\HTTPRequest.py", line 1214, in __g etitem__ raise KeyError, key KeyError: 'URL' -- ___________________________________________________ Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/

2 1

Folderish or SimpleItem object types for structural content
by Martijn Jacobs 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

Hello guys! I have a simple question about the design of hierarchical zope product structures in Zope 2. For example, you have categories, within categories you have sub-categories, within sub-categories you have sub-sub categories, within that you have content items, within content items you have....etcetera. All those products are different 'types', with different functionality and different 'roles' as what they represent, so I write different products for every type. For every object that can contain subobjects you could derive it from 'Folder' (or Object Manager). But when you derive all these product types from 'Folder' you end up with ALOT of objects in your database. In a lot of real world cases you have categories and items, that makes things easy, but what about the structure explained above? My question for you guys is : When do you decide to make it a Folderish object which contains sub-objects, or to make it a Simple Item object with, for example, some structured XML content, or dictionary / list properties containing the 'sub-structure'? The last option is more work, because you have to write your add/edit/delete/etc code yourself, writing it with Folders makes it more easily, but then you have an explosion of objects in the ZODB. I would like to have some fresh thoughts about this, so maybe you can help. Thank you in advance, kind regards, Martijn. -- Martijn Jacobs Four Digits, internet solutions e-mail: martijn(a)fourdigits.nl | web: http://www.fourdigits.nl tel: +31 (0)26 44 22 700 | fax: +31 (0)84 22 06 117

3 6

buildbot failure in Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot
by buildbot＠zope.com 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 1919 Blamelist: chrisw,ctheune BUILD FAILED: failed test sincerely, -The Buildbot

3 3

Python2.4 Security Audit ETA???
by Alan Milligan 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Aeons ago someone promised that said Zope security audit of Python 2.4 was scheduled for October. I've not yet seen any happy announcements that Zope is now 2.4 compliant, and do want to highlight the importance of achieving this goal. Python2.4 has been out for almost a year now, and it's fairly ubiquitous. There've been many statements made on this list about people quite happily running their Zope's - contrary to white hat advice. With the major distro's, Python is entrenched in their installer and gui processes and *all* packaging is focused around a single python (2.4 for everyone excepting our BastionLinux). In reality it is infeasible to support a second version of Python for Z2. Many modules have SWIG bindings (while core Z2 doesn't require much of this, a number of products do), requiring multiple package versions - build systems cannot cope with this scenario without massive spec customisations (which is all pointless given the window of this requirement - and of course that we've all actually learnt something for python2.5, python2.6 ....) We are getting an increasing number of people attempting to load incompatible packages. It is not possible to downgrade python. Most of userland is not competent to get a secondary python2.3 installation running - especially when packages such as python-ldap are simply not available for their old python and new ldap etc etc which all requires custom package builds. We are also stuck in a time-warp actually having to back-port a large proportion of recent linux packages because we'd like to make new features available, increasing costs and testing requirements. It is also no longer possible for customers to subscribe to just a single channel because our core is substantially different to their chosen vendor's installation, and packages will be installed into meaningless python paths etc. Can someone please give me an ETA on this, so I can decide if and how to support zope in light of other pressing linux requirements for our distro. Alan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDi/JXCfroLk4EZpkRAlGgAKC1ZjYut1GG55TlxUyVxtD1y+YLKgCg1IV6 vsT9SOOBMUxBP4i1qo7+7q0= =MuMS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

7 9

buildbot failure in Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot
by buildbot＠zope.com 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 1921 Blamelist: chrisw BUILD FAILED: failed test sincerely, -The Buildbot

2 1

Zope tests: 8 OK
by Zope tests summarizer 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Thu Dec 1 12:01:02 2005 UTC to Fri Dec 2 12:01:02 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 1 22:15:43 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003690.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 1 22:17:13 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003691.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 1 22:18:44 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003692.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 1 22:20:14 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003693.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 1 22:21:44 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003694.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 1 22:23:14 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003695.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_9-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 1 22:24:44 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003696.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Thu Dec 1 22:26:14 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003697.html

1 0

Short tutorial on I18n with Five
by Philipp von Weitershausen 01 Dec '05

01 Dec '05

I'm happy to announce that I've finally managed to document the internationalization (i18n) features that Five has brought to the Zope 2 world since version 1.1: http://worldcookery.com/files/fivei18n This short tutorial compares current Zope-2-based solutions to the i18n problem with the Zope 3 i18n framework. It also gives a few pointers on how to use the latter in Zope 2 applications through the means of Five. It is not a full-blown tutorial and it expects the reader to be quite familiar with i18n-aware software development in Zope already. Target audience is mostly people switching over their Zope 2 products to Zope 3 technology which i18n is a part of. The tutorial also serves as a documentation of a new Zope 2 core feature because Five 1.3 is included in Zope 2.9 which is thus the first Zope 2 version to come with built-in i18n support!

1 0

zope.conf extensibility
by Sidnei da Silva 01 Dec '05

01 Dec '05

This might be the third time I hit this issue, and I've always given up before. I hope this is the last time. I have some product that would greatly benefit from being able to be configured from within zope.conf. I don't want a separate configuration file. Period. Why? Apache doesn't have separate configuration files for mod_cache or mod_anything. Chris McDonough has used the %import feature on ClockServer product, but that just works because zopeschema.xml has a <multisection> definition for ZServer.server type. I think it would be very useful for zopeschema.xml to have a <multisection> for some abstract type to allow third-party product to define their own section type extending this abstract type and thus have their configuration kept inside zope.conf Consider this a proposal *wink*. -- Sidnei da Silva Enfold Systems, LLC. http://enfoldsystems.com

3 6

Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository
by Stephan Richter 01 Dec '05

01 Dec '05

On Wednesday 23 November 2005 10:16, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > Sounds crazy, I know. But I'm serious. Looking for your comments at: > http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReuniteZope2AndZope3InTheSourceCodeRepository I am -1. If I could I would veto this proposal. Here is why: To be totally honest, I really, really don't care about Zope 2! I am a Zope 3 developer. If Zope 2 code is in the Zope 3 code base, I have to relearn it again and additionally learn Five. Why? Just so I can keep developing Zope 3. This may raise the contribution bar too high for me and I would consider stopping to contribute. If the bar is too high for me, what do you expect from other people? Next, there are several third party applications that do not care about Zope 2 either, but that use the trunk to do their development with. One example is SchoolTool. Having to checkout both, Zope 3 and 2 would just be ridiculous, to say the least! (Note that several contributions of mine during the last weeks were due to my work on SchoolTool using a writeable Zope 3 trunk checkout.) The proposal only benefits Zope 2 people, really. Sure, some of the stuff in Zope 2 that should be forward-ported, but that's minimal. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training

10 18

Zope tests: 8 OK
by Zope tests summarizer 01 Dec '05

01 Dec '05

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Nov 30 12:01:02 2005 UTC to Thu Dec 1 12:01:02 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 Nov 30 22:15:17 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-November/003682.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Nov 30 22:16:47 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-November/003683.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Nov 30 22:18:17 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-November/003684.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Nov 30 22:19:47 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-November/003685.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Nov 30 22:21:17 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-November/003686.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Nov 30 22:22:47 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-November/003687.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_9-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Nov 30 22:24:17 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-November/003688.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Nov 30 22:25:47 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-November/003689.html

1 0