November 2008 - Zope-Dev

automatic authentication after signup
by Jayarajan Jn 07 Nov '08

07 Nov '08

Hi ALL, I have been doing an authentcation package with signup and login/logout features using PAU. When i refered to philips book and the worldcookery example i found the following codes in the signup logic. class SignUpView(BaseSignUpView): signUpForm = ViewPageTemplateFile('signup.pt') def signUp(self, login, title, password, confirmation): if confirmation != password: raise UserError(_(u"Password and confirmation didn't match")) folder = self._signupfolder() if login in folder: raise UserError(_(u"This login has already been chosen.")) principal_id = folder.signUp(login, password, title) role_manager = IPrincipalRoleManager(self.context) role_manager = removeSecurityProxy(role_manager) # <- wot does it really do and how does it make the newly # created user to be authenticated automatically for role in folder.signup_roles: role_manager.assignRoleToPrincipal(role, principal_id) self.request.response.redirect("@@welcome.html") The above logic works well for me too. But if i comment the line 'role_manager = removeSecurityProxy(role_manager)',still user creation and role assignment works. but i am asked to login again right after the signup. and the redirect does not work. And another apporch i have seen in http://kelpi.com/script/e2019a http://kelpi.com/script/f49219 so i tried to set the principal as principal=pau.getPrincipal(principal_id) sel.request.setPrincipal(principal) and commented the removeSecurityProxy line. But it also gives same result. So is there any other way than using removeSecurityProxy(role_manager)? I also would like to know how risky it can be to use removeSecurityProxy in a code with public (zope.public) permission. I Know this is very trivial issue and everyone have gone through this once. Thanks in advance.

1 0

Zope Tests: 4 OK, 2 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 07 Nov '08

07 Nov '08

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Thu Nov 6 12:00:00 2008 UTC to Fri Nov 7 12:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests. Test failures ------------- Subject: FAILED (failures=2) : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 6 20:41:36 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010440.html Subject: FAILED (failures=2) : Zope-trunk Python-2.5.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 6 20:43:06 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010441.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.7 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 6 20:35:35 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010436.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 6 20:37:05 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010437.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 6 20:38:36 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010438.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 6 20:40:06 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010439.html

1 0

misterious btree issue
by Adam GROSZER 06 Nov '08

06 Nov '08

Hello, I've run into a misterious issue while evolving generations from an old DB. Quick fact is that it seems like a BTree kept an object reference to an object which was deleted from it. I'll try to explain/dig into below. BTrees source is of revision 75706, running on win32, compiled with mingw32. The evolution is about totally removing a utility because it's source will be ripped out in the next generation. It's in z3c.vocabulary. The utility contains objects in BtreeContainers recursively. Problem was that the loop at #kill ALL should have removed all object references from IntIds. For the first look it removed all, the loop at #clean intids never found one (toremove was always empty). All seemed fine, until the next generation came along and tried to touch all objects in ZODB. (ZODB was packed first) And *failed* on an instance of the utility. (source was gone) Debugging that found utility with http://www.zopelabs.com/cookbook/1114086617 clearly showed that it is still referenced by the IntIds.ids OIBTree, though impossible to reach via IntIds.ids.keys() or IntIds.ids.values(). What helped was to recreate both IntId BTrees from scratch, like at #recreate intid trees. That and packing made the utility finally go away. Anybody noticed something like this? -------------------------------------- def evolve(context): """Evolve the ZODB. - remove IVocabularyManager utilities """ root = getRootFolder(context) storage = context.connection._storage for site in findObjectsProviding(root, interfaces.IRecruiterSite): originalSite = hooks.getSite() hooks.setSite(site) sm = site.getSiteManager() if sm['default'].has_key('vocabularyManager'): vm = sm['default']['vocabularyManager'] ##kill ALL #remove all items from the utility to remove them from IntIds for k,v in list(vm.items()): for kk, vv in list(v.items()): for kkk, vvv in list(vv.items()): del vv[kkk] del v[kk] del vm[k] sm.unregisterUtility(vm, IVocabularyManager, '') del sm['default']['vocabularyManager'] if sm['default'].has_key('ids'): #clean intids iidutil = sm['default']['ids'] toremove = [] for id in iidutil: obj = iidutil.getObject(id) if not belowsite(obj, site): toremove.append(obj) if obj.__module__.startswith("z3c.vocabulary"): toremove.append(obj) for k, id in iidutil.ids.items(): obj = iidutil.getObject(id) if obj.__module__.startswith("z3c.vocabulary"): toremove.append(obj) if k.object.__module__.startswith("z3c.vocabulary"): toremove.append(k.object) for obj in toremove: iidutil.unregister(obj) #recreate intid trees: #because it seems like sometimes some buckets or whatever #reference objects once they are long gone ids = iidutil.ids refs = iidutil.refs iidutil.ids = iidutil.family.OI.BTree() iidutil.refs = iidutil.family.IO.BTree() for k,v in ids.items(): iidutil.ids[k] = v for k,v in refs.items(): iidutil.refs[k] = v ----------------------- #next generation touching all objects def evolve(context): """Evolve the ZODB. """ storage = context.connection._storage next_oid = None while True: oid, tid, data, next_oid = storage.record_iternext(next_oid) modname, classname = get_pickle_metadata(data) obj = context.connection.get(oid) # Make sure that we tell all objects that they have been changed. Who # cares whether it is true! :-) obj._p_activate() obj._p_changed = True if next_oid is None: break -- Best regards, Adam GROSZER mailto:agroszer@gmail.com -- Quote of the day: When a deep injury is done us, we never recover until we forgive. - Alan Paton

4 6

Zope Tests: 4 OK, 2 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 06 Nov '08

06 Nov '08

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Nov 5 12:00:00 2008 UTC to Thu Nov 6 12:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests. Test failures ------------- Subject: FAILED (failures=2) : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 5 20:39:55 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010434.html Subject: FAILED (failures=2) : Zope-trunk Python-2.5.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 5 20:41:25 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010435.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.7 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 5 20:33:55 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010430.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 5 20:35:25 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010431.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 5 20:36:55 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010432.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 5 20:38:25 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010433.html

1 0

Event for system shutdown?
by Andreas Jung 06 Nov '08

06 Nov '08

Is there an event in Zope 3 indicating a Zope server shutdown? Andreas

1 0

Will new release of zope3 include TSL/SSL in zope.sendmail
by Jayarajan Jn 06 Nov '08

06 Nov '08

Hi ALL, When will the next release of zope3 will be? will there be a zope3.4c2? By the way i wish to know whether next release will include the latest release of zope.sendmail which has TSL/SSL feature. I have noticed that last release, zope3.4c01 was on 31 Jan 2008. http://www.zope.org/Products/Zope3/3.4.0c1 And the zope.sendmail has trunked SSL/TLS feature on 19th Aug 2008. http://svn.zope.org/zope.sendmail/trunk/src/zope/sendmail/mailer.py?rev=927… So its obvious that zope3.4c01 don't have SSL/TLS feature in its zope.sendmail. And i have seen some other many other fixes in the zope.sendmail that enables it to work well with gmail and similar So i hope we can see new zope.sendmail in the next release. Regards, jayaraj

2 1

Interface for renderable component
by Malthe Borch 06 Nov '08

06 Nov '08

Currently a number of z3c.* packages rely on ``zope.pagetemplate.interfaces.IPageTemplate`` even though they don't care at all that it's a template they're getting. All they need to know is that it's a callable and that it returns HTML. I think it'd be a good idea to introduce the following interface that we can use instead: class IRenderer(Interface): def __call__(**kwargs): """Outputs HTML.""" This interface should be defined in a package with minimal dependencies. \malthe

4 11

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: Zope/trunk/lib/python/Zope2/App/ Add check for doomed transactions in default transaction manager, abort silently if the tm tries to commit a doomed transaction
by Tres Seaver 06 Nov '08

06 Nov '08

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Wilkes wrote: > Log message for revision 92792: Add check for doomed transactions in > default transaction manager, abort silently if the tm tries to commit > a doomed transaction Why is this a good thing? Do you have real use cases where doomed transactions are causing tracebacks, and where that isn't just a bug in your code which you should be fixing? Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver(a)palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJEjlC+gerLs4ltQ4RAn91AKCuYBYT37Ajru4oGKkwnqvTkD/a1QCfRrdd QGVLYDPGvxs3vTTE8A9O27Y= =P3Ws -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Zope Tests: 4 OK, 2 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 05 Nov '08

05 Nov '08

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Tue Nov 4 12:00:00 2008 UTC to Wed Nov 5 12:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests. Test failures ------------- Subject: FAILED (failures=2) : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 4 21:08:38 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010428.html Subject: FAILED (failures=2) : Zope-trunk Python-2.5.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 4 21:10:08 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010429.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.7 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 4 21:02:37 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010424.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 4 21:04:07 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010425.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 4 21:05:37 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010426.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.5 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 4 21:07:08 EST 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-November/010427.html

1 0

Proposal: Backporting some Python 2.5/2.6 fixes
by Sidnei da Silva 04 Nov '08

04 Nov '08

Hi all, I would like to propose backporting some of the fixes needed for Python 2.5 and 2.6 all the way down to Zope 2.10. The fixes that would be backported would only be those that deal with syntax changes (eg: 'with' and 'as' keyword being used as variables, relative imports) and some C-level changes, to Acquisition and zope.app.container if I recall. I would *not* backport changes to RestrictedPython because those are actually features (support for newer versions of Python) as opposed to the other changes, which are just 'bugfixes' IMHO. Would anyone be against this? -- Sidnei da Silva Enfold Systems http://enfoldsystems.com Fax +1 832 201 8856 Office +1 713 942 2377 Ext 214 Skype zopedc

9 31