June 2005 - Zope-Dev

Event & Timer Service for Zope 2.8
by Andrew Veitch 26 Jul '05

26 Jul '05

I noticed there was a thread last month on an event service for Zope. Did that reach any conclusion? From what I can see the present products are: - http://www.zope.org/Members/lstaffor/Xron - Zope 2.6 only, not being developed - http://zope.org/Members/naumen/NauScheduler - shipped with one of the Zope CMS's works fine with 2.7 - http://dev.legco.biz/products/ZopeScheduler and http://dev.legco.biz/products/timerservice - works fine with 2.7 too - http://cvs.zope.org/Products/Event/ - event service without a time service, not sure of development status - http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-cmf/2005-January/021747.html - Dieter's project to be based on Python's sched module - http://api.nuxeo.org/CPS3/public/ CPSCore.EventServiceTool.EventServiceTool-class.html - CPS's event service - http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*checkout*/mailmanager/ mailmanager/MailCheckThread.py?rev=1.15 - our custom scheduler for MailManager - Zope X3's event service It would be great to some consolidation of all of this into the core. I would also strongly favour a timer service along with the event service. I know that the argument has always been that operating systems provide time services but this is not very convenient for cross platform development and on some Windows platforms it's difficult. A -- Logical Progression Ltd, 20 Forth Street, Edinburgh EH1 3LH, UK Tel: +44 (0)131 550 3733 Web: http://www.logicalprogression.net/

5 14

Problems with PageTemplates on Zope 2.8
by Morten W. Petersen 01 Jul '05

01 Jul '05

Hi, I have an application called the Issue Dealer which I'm porting to Zope 2.8. However, whenever I try to access a PageTemplate which makes use of a page template macro it just hangs and consumes all available CPU. Any ideas what could be wrong here, or how I could debug it? Thanks, Morten PS: CC me as I'm not on the list

4 5

Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces
by Jean-Marc Orliaguet 01 Jul '05

01 Jul '05

Eric Barroca wrote: > Hello, > > > Following the announces from Zope Corporation yesterday about their > willingness to create a Zope Foundation (that would manage > independently Zope 2 and Zope 3 projects) and to participate actively > in the Z3ECM project, I would like to express briefly Nuxeo's > position about all the news. > > First, we would like to thank Zope Corporation for Zope 2 and Zope 3 > as Open Source software, they are amazing products ! > > For us as far as we know, the Zope Foundation is a really great news. > This will probably solve the main issues we heard from people in the > community and from some customers (brand and copyright security). > It's really great news that Zope Corporation is now ready to go > further on the community way and involvement. We are ready to help as > much as needed in establishing the ZF as a vendor-neutral > organisation with the mission to develop and promote a great > technology (like the Apache or Eclipse Foundations). > The Zope Foundation will, IOHO, a big step towards "project 10X" to > establish Zope as a leading development platform for all kinds of web > and internet applications. > > On the Z3ECM project, we are very glad that Zope Corporation wants to > actively join the project ! > We are certain that having ZC resources on this project will clearly > help to build better products and solidify the platform. > > We will also support the move of the Z3ECM project to the ZF when the > issues of copyright ownership will be discussed with the project > stakeholders. It could definitely help unifying CMS zope community > and will give more credibility to the platform from a customer point > of view. > > We will also support the move of the Z3ECM project to the ZF when the > issues of copyright ownership will be discussed with the project > stakeholders > > In short, we are really happy and excited, and will definitely > supports ZC to move forward on these topics with the other members of > the Zope community. > > I'm pretty confident that the whole community will support this as well. > > > Best regards, > > EB. > > -- > Éric Barroca, Tel: +33 6 21 74 77 64 (mobile). > Nuxeo Collaborative Portal Server: http://www.nuxeo.com/cps > Gestion de contenu web / portail collaboratif / groupware / open source! > www.nuxeo.com - www.cps-project.org - www.indesko.com > Hi! This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more vendor-neutral. I am confident that this will go through. regards /JM

8 20

Zope 2.8: ZODB fix breaks undoable_transactions
by yuppie 29 Jun '05

29 Jun '05

Hi! http://svn.zope.org/?view=rev&rev=30334 changed the behavior of undoInfo() in a way that is not backwards compatible. See http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1822 for details. I can see 3 ways to resolve this: 1.) restoring the old behavior of undoInfo() in ZODB 2.) restoring the old behavior of undoable_transactions() 3.) propagating the change to all the code that depends on undoable_transactions() I don't know all the reasons why undoInfo() was changed, so I don't know if reverting the change is an option. If 1.) is no option, I would prefer solution 2.) over 3.) Any opinions? Cheers, Yuppie

2 5

2.8.1 release schedule
by Andreas Jung 29 Jun '05

29 Jun '05

Please see: http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.8/MilestonePlan -aj

1 0

SAP SSO for Zope/CookieCrumbler/LDAPUserFolder
by Dirk Datzert 27 Jun '05

27 Jun '05

Hi, this is my solution for SSO for Zope by accepting SAP-SSO-Ticket. SAP-SSO-Tickets are Cookies named MYSAPSSO2. They contain SAP-PortalUserName, SAP-Username, Validate-Time of the ticket and a signed signature by the issueing SAP-System. Since we currently use CookieCrumbler and LDAPUserFolder it was my goal to let the CookieCrumbler take the MYSAPSSO2 Cookie from the Request, let it be validated by an external ticket verification service, store the validated TicketInfo in the SESSION variable and let LDAPUserFolder load the trusted PortalUser with roles from the LDAP-Directory. Any comments or security discussion is welcome. Zope 2.7.6, CookieCrumbler 1.2, LDAPUserFolder 2.5 Regards, Dirk -- Geschenkt: 3 Monate GMX ProMail gratis + 3 Ausgaben stern gratis ++ Jetzt anmelden & testen ++ http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail ++

2 1

SAP SSO feature for Zope/LDAPUserFolder
by Dirk Datzert 26 Jun '05

26 Jun '05

Hi, we have Zope 2.6.4 and 2.7.6 with LDAPUserFolder and CookieCrumbler in use. One of our next goals is to integrate the Single-Sign-On-Ticket feature of SAP-Portal. SAP sent a cookie called MYSAPSSO2 which contains a certified signature and the Login-Name of a user. Normally the Login-Name will be validated by LDAPUserFolder with password against LDAP-Directory and the roles of the user will be assigned to the user object. We have now an external web-service which can validate the MYSAPSSO2-Ticket and return the Login-Name. I'm looking now for the best way to integrate/rewrite CookieCrumbler/LDAPUserFolder to take the validated Login-Name and read the roles of the user out of the LDAP-directory. Any ideas ? Maybe comments by Jens or Shane ? Regards, Dirk -- Geschenkt: 3 Monate GMX ProMail gratis + 3 Ausgaben stern gratis ++ Jetzt anmelden & testen ++ http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail ++

4 7

ZOBD and pointers
by Yair Benita 21 Jun '05

21 Jun '05

Hi All, As my ZODB data files become larger and larger I am looking at ways to make the structure of my objects more efficient. To simplify my question, suppose I have two different classes and both contain a list of a objects from a third class: class x has the attribute x.elements = [objects of class z] class y has the attribute y.elements = [objects of class z] As far as I understand python the lists x.elements and y.elements contain pointers to the z objects previously defined. What I wanted to know is how ZODB handles that (or maybe I should say: how pickle handles that) when saving to a file. Will the pointers be converted to a copy of the z class objects or will one copy of the z class objects be saved and than the x.elements and y.elements will still be a list of pointers? Thanks for the help, Yair -- Yair Benita Utrecht University The Netherlands

4 8

FW: [Zope-Annce] Zope Foundation ideas
by Hadar Pedhazur 20 Jun '05

20 Jun '05

FYI, for the few of you who may not actually listen to the "bigger" lists ;-) -----Original Message----- From: zope-announce-bounces(a)zope.org [mailto:zope-announce-bounces@zope.org] On Behalf Of Rob Page Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 5:54 PM To: zope(a)zope.org; zope-announce(a)zope.org Subject: [Zope-Annce] Zope Foundation ideas In preparation for tomorrow's IRC session (reminder/details below) we have prepared some initial ideas about the Zope Foundation. These are available online at: o http://tinyurl.com/74pd3 Note -- the document is written with phrases like "the Foundation will", "Contributors shall", etc. This is NOT to be interpreted as though these terms/conditions are predetermined. It is written to close in on specific language that avoids misinterpretation. Zope Foundation IRC Session --------------------------- IRC Session Summary: - Who: Zope Corp and Zope Community - What: IRC session to discuss the Zope Foundation - When: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10a - 12p (US EDT) - Where: irc.freenode.net #zope Please send specific questions to: mailto:irc_agenda_topics@zope.com Hope to see you there. Regards, Rob -- Rob Page V: 540.361.1710 Zope Corporation F: 703.995.0412

1 0

Re: [Z3lab] Zope Corporation's Initial Reaction on the ZF Comments
by Martijn Faassen 20 Jun '05

20 Jun '05

Hadar Pedhazur wrote: [clarifications and opinions] Hey, I just wanted to chip in that: * I'm very happy a foundation has been announced. This is what I and others advocated for, starting in earnest after the castle sprint last year. This is a major step in the right direction. Thank you Zope Corporation! I also wish to thank Nuxeo in their active role in taking this further. Some points I think we all agree on: * We all agree that the Foundation should be vendor-neutral. Those of us in business, we're competing and cooperating at the same time, and the Foundation will need to be on the balance. * We all agree that the Foundation should be about more than just vendors. To those of us who are independent, the Foundation needs to listen to their voice as well, not just the vendors. We have extremely significant contributors in the community who are vendor neutral. I need to mention only the authors of the two Zope 3 books currently published. Now on a more personal note: * I am confident that Zope Corporation will do the right thing. Time and time again I've found that Zope Corporation does listen. Let's all not forget this. * From my perspective as a company co-owner: the Foundation should be vendor-friendly. We should accept that one of the reasons it exists is to help vendors sell Zope better. ("its future is assured in a foundation with N members"). This self interest is fine, as long as we can all cooperate in a fair way. (a state of self-interested cooperation is ideal, I'd say, in fact) * It's important for all parties involved to reach clarity about the relationship of the Zope Foundation with existing foundations and initiatives within the Zope community. We dont want uncertainty and confusion and we want to *stimulate* initiatives by the community. The community is after all one of our greatest resources. * From my perspective as a developer: I hope politics won't get into the way of development too much. We'll inevitably and necessarily have politics in the period leading up to the creation of the Foundation, to ensure everybody's interests are being looked after. We'll have some more after the Foundation has been formed. Let's try to stay out of the developers' hair. Many of them don't want to be involved in politics or cannot be on a personal basis as they work for a company. We don't want them worried or pressurized by all of this. Again, the community is one of our greatest resources. Regards, Martijn

2 1