April 2005 - Zope-Dev

2.8.0b1 issues with plone 2.0.5
by Tim Hicks 25 Apr '05

25 Apr '05

Apologies if this is already known about... I just installed 2.8.0b1 (using python 2.3.5), fired it up, then tried to add a 'plone site' (2.0.5). The plone site actually did get added, but here's what I got as well: 2005-04-24 12:57:32 ERROR Zope.ZCatalog Recataloging object at /test/test/index_html failed Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/tim/zope/2.8.0b1/lib/python/Products/ZCatalog/ZCatalog.py", line 298, in refreshCatalog self.catalog_object(obj, p, pghandler=pghandler) TypeError: catalog_object() got an unexpected keyword argument 'pghandler' 2005-04-24 12:57:34 ERROR Zope.SiteErrorLog http://glenmore.dyndns.org:7080/test/test/index_html Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/tim/zope/2.8.0b1/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py", line 113, in publish request, bind=1) File "/home/tim/zope/2.8.0b1/lib/python/ZPublisher/mapply.py", line 88, in mapply if debug is not None: return debug(object,args,context) File "/home/tim/zope/2.8.0b1/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py", line 40, in call_object result=apply(object,args) # Type s<cr> to step into published object. File "/home/tim/zope/2.7.4b2/Products/CMFCore/PortalContent.py", line 116, in __call__ return view() File "/home/tim/zope/2.8.0b1/lib/python/Shared/DC/Scripts/Bindings.py", line 311, in __call__ return self._bindAndExec(args, kw, None) File "/home/tim/zope/2.8.0b1/lib/python/Shared/DC/Scripts/Bindings.py", line 348, in _bindAndExec return self._exec(bound_data, args, kw) File "/home/tim/zope/2.7.4b2/Products/CMFCore/FSPageTemplate.py", line 191, in _exec result = self.pt_render(extra_context=bound_names) File "/home/tim/zope/2.7.4b2/Products/CMFCore/FSPageTemplate.py", line 124, in pt_render result = FSPageTemplate.inheritedAttribute('pt_render')( File "/home/tim/zope/2.8.0b1/lib/python/Products/PageTemplates/PageTemplate.py", line 96, in pt_render c = self.pt_getContext() TypeError: unbound method pt_getContext() must be called with ZopePageTemplate instance as first argument (got nothing instead)

4 5

Data manager interface -- tpc_begin and other changes
by Jim Fulton 25 Apr '05

25 Apr '05

This is for people who've implemented ZODB data managers. Data managers are components that manage persistent data under transaction control, We've recently tried to clean up and document the data-manager interfaces. In addition, over the weekend, I implemented savepoints and was able to simplify the interfaces quite a bit. See IDataManager and ISavePointDatamanager in: http://svn.zope.org/ZODB/trunk/src/transaction/interfaces.py?view=markup In particular, note that: - The subtransaction APIs have disappeared fro data managers, and - tpc_begin no longer takes a second "subtransaction" argument. I *could* try to provide support for data managers with tpc_begin taking 2 arguments, but I'm guessing that I don't need to. I'm guessing that no one has written data managers that require a second argument. If this is not true and you have a data manager that requires a second argument that I need to support, please let me know. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:jim@zope.com Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org

1 0

BTreeFolder2 for Zope 2.8?
by Andreas Jung 25 Apr '05

25 Apr '05

Any objections to move BTreeFolder2 into the Zope core for Zope 2.8? BTF is widely used in the Zope, CMF & Plone world and it would not hurt to ship it with Zope. Andreas

6 6

Zope 2.8 b1 coming ...
by Andreas Jung 22 Apr '05

22 Apr '05

Hi, last chance to commit your changes and patches and whatever for the first 2.8 beta release. I am going to make the release over the weekend. Andreas

1 0

Re: [Zope-Coders] Unauthorized results in 401, shouldn't it result in 403?
by Chris Withers 21 Apr '05

21 Apr '05

Sidnei da Silva wrote: > | Now, 5.2 is where I have the problem, since raising unauthorized > | anywhere in Zope traditionally pops up a basic auth box rather than > | returning standard_error_message with a 403 response which, as time goes > | by, I'm starting to think is what should really happen. > > Yes! That too. > > | 1. Should things change to work as I describe? > > I would think so. OK, but I would prefer more opinions on this, so moving to zope-dev(a)zope.org... > | 2. Is the above behaviour pluggable at all? > > Not at all. Should it be? Can it be without impacting on performance? > | 3. How does PAS handle failover from one authentication plugin to the next? > > /me leaves slot for PAS experts to fill ... > | 4. What kicks off the authentication process in Zope? Something being > | anonymously viewable or credentials being found in the request? > > I've been looking at BaseRequest.traverse(). Basically, it tries to > validate REQUEST._auth, What does? And what does validate mean in this context? > being it set or not *wink* (when using Right, and that was the source of the other thread? > CookieCrumbler it's this variable is set from the cookie value) and > that may result in a valid user or 'Anonymous User'. Yeah, but how does CookieCrumbler stop a basic auth box being popped to the user when things aren't authorized? > | PS: I suspect the answer to 4 varies depending on the type of auth :-( > > I don't think so. CookieCrumbler vs Everything Else: I think it does... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

4 5

Turning off product installation in zope.conf on all zeo clients?
by Chris Withers 20 Apr '05

20 Apr '05

Hi, There's an option to turn off prudct installation in zope.conf. What happens if you turn this off in all zeo clients? cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

3 6

I want Zope 2.9 to use Zope 3's security architecture.
by Jim Fulton 20 Apr '05

20 Apr '05

I very much want Zope 2.9 to use Zope 3's security architecture. Zope 3's security architecture is far more robust, but it is different in some significant ways: - It protects names not values. This means that you protect how you access things, not the things themselves. - It doesn't provide key-bases access control for mapping objects. If you can get any key, you can get all keys. This is less powerful that Zope 2's security system, but this is power we haven't needed for Zope 3 and I suggest we don't really need it for Zope 2. - Non-basic values passed from trusted code to untrusted code are security proxied and thus protected. This means that the security framework has a much greater reach than in Zope 2, Even trusted code is subject to the security system in many cases. This can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your point of view. :) - The Zope 3 security system is much more pluggable. This means that it is much easier to provide alternate security policies to meet special needs to or exclude unneeded features. For more information on the security system, see: http://svn.zope.org/Zope3/trunk/src/zope/security/untrustedinterpreter.txt?… http://svn.zope.org/Zope3/trunk/src/zope/security/README.txt?view=markup http://svn.zope.org/Zope3/trunk/src/zope/app/securitypolicy/zopepolicy.txt?… http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/Programmer… I see 2 main challenges: - supporting implicit acquisition - Backward incompatibilities: o No support for key-based access control o Trusted code will be subject to security restrictions in cases in which it isn't now. I think there will be a number of significant benefits, including: - Greater security - Less complexity - Less risk with new Python versions - Narrower gap between Zope 2 and Zope 3. This will be a fairly large job. I won't have time to work on it before this Fall. I could certianly use some help. :) Are there any objections? Suggestions? Questions? Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:jim@zope.com Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org

11 25

debug-mode on under Windows 2000.
by DonJFreeman＠cs.com 19 Apr '05

19 Apr '05

Zope Version: (Zope 2.7.3-0, python 2.3.4, win32) Python Version: 2.3.4 (#53, May 25 2004, 21:17:02) [MSC v.1200 32 bit (Intel)] System Platform: Windows 2000 I'm trying to get Zope to reload my Python modules so I don't have to restart Zope after code changes. Even with debug-mode on (according to the zope config file, it defaults to on) my modules are not being reloaded unless I do a restart. Is there a fix for this? Thanks, Don

2 1

Editing using Firefox
by Jeff Nielsen 16 Apr '05

16 Apr '05

Sorry in advance if this issue has been covered a bzillion times already... I'm playing with editing my Zope site using Firefox as I can open Document and Method objects in tabbed windows and switch back and forth between them. However, the tab title, based on the page title, for each object is just "Zope". Is there a way to get the object name to be used as the page title and hence the tab title? I've searched about a bit for an answer and no joy so far. Jeff Nielsen UgoFast http://www.UgoFast.com Jeff(a)UgoFast.com

2 1

CMF TypesTool breaks id
by Alan Milligan 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I'm astounded that nobody has come across this before, but the CMFCore.TypesTool.constructContent() function is supposed to return the object id in the event that no RESPONSE is passed in - at least according to CMFPlone.PloneFolder.invokeFactory(). Presently, it in fact returns nothing - breaking this implicit contract. This has the unfortunate effect of *NOT* allowing you to generate your own object id within your object construction function (we have a number of requirements where external systems expect to see id's of particular formats and I don't want to depend upon/pollute the generateId script with specific meta_type requirements). Plone's createObject script can't find this newly constructed object as it's id isn't that generated by the generateId script and fails trying to do a getTypeInfo() call on a None object. I'm posting the patch here because in my mind this *IS* a very important patch and I find the release schedule for CMF{Core,Default} inextricable ;) Alan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCX+AzCfroLk4EZpkRAq8tAKCVoo1JRfsueciFsJGg4WfMT2sqTgCgoyDF 5XtSXJ1IGopWx0FVQ2kct1M= =MgKf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- CMFCore/TypesTool.py.orig 2005-04-16 01:04:05.181168664 +1000 +++ CMFCore/TypesTool.py 2005-04-16 00:58:19.661695608 +1000 @@ -712,6 +712,7 @@ immediate_url = '%s/%s' % ( ob.absolute_url() , info.immediate_view ) RESPONSE.redirect( immediate_url ) + return ob.getId() security.declarePrivate( 'listActions' ) def listActions( self, info=None ):

2 1