Zope-Dev March 2008

zope-dev@zope.dev

43 participants
63 discussions

Zope Tests: 5 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 31 Mar '08

31 Mar '08

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Sun Mar 30 11:00:00 2008 UTC to Mon Mar 31 11:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 5 messages: 5 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Mar 30 20:58:13 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009330.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Mar 30 20:59:43 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009331.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Mar 30 21:01:14 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009332.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Mar 30 21:02:44 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009333.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Mar 30 21:04:14 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009334.html

1 0

Zope Tests: 5 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 30 Mar '08

30 Mar '08

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Sat Mar 29 11:00:00 2008 UTC to Sun Mar 30 11:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 5 messages: 5 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Mar 29 21:52:31 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009325.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Mar 29 21:54:01 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009326.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Mar 29 21:55:31 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009327.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Mar 29 21:57:01 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009328.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Mar 29 21:58:32 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009329.html

1 0

Zope 3 on Jython - Google Summer of Code
by Georgy Berdyshev 29 Mar '08

29 Mar '08

Hello Zope developers and Zope community! I am applying with "Zope 3 on Jython improvements" to Google Summer of Code. It would be really a great help to receive some feedback on this undertaking from the community and also developers of Zope! Please have a look at the following thread on the Zope GSoC malinglist: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/gsoc/2008-March/000136.html Thanks in advance! Kind regards, Georgy Berdyshv -- Georgy Berdyshev GPG key: 830F68C5 Fingerprint: 0379 ED5A BEE5 65A8 7BD5 31E7 F5B4 1EC7 830F 68C5

4 6

Zope Tests: 5 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 29 Mar '08

29 Mar '08

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Fri Mar 28 12:00:00 2008 UTC to Sat Mar 29 12:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 5 messages: 5 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Mar 28 21:50:54 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009320.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Mar 28 21:52:24 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009321.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Mar 28 21:53:54 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009322.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Mar 28 21:55:25 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009323.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Mar 28 21:56:55 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009324.html

1 0

Re: AW: SVN: z3c.zrtresource/trunk/src/z3c/zrtresource/zrtresource.pyz3c.zrtresource is made to work in Zope2. A docstring wasadded as the zope2 publisher won't publish otherwise. Added aconditional import on Five's FileResource. Only oneconditiona
by Tres Seaver 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Nikolay Kim wrote: >>>> Probably this is not much important enough for that >>>> *import* usecase, but if we start with that, can you tell >>>> me wheres the border with mixin code into Zope3 packages >>>> and what is Ok and where do we stop? >>> I agree it should rarely be used, but it was just one import so then >>> I thought it was ok. >> Conditional import are ugly and many of us doesn't use zope2 at all. > > And many of us do use Zope2 and want to be able to use all the nice > Zope3 technology. A single conditional import is an extremely small > price to pay to give a large group of people access to new technology. > > I thought the componentized Zope 3 was all about making it easier to > reuse modules. Did that change? I don't know. I think the objection to the change was that it introduced a dependency inversion, as well as making it impossible to test the code properly (you would need to run the tests in both an environment with and without Five present). In general, bridging gaps between the "depended on" Zope 3 stuff and the "dependent" Zope2 stuff is not supposed to involve introducing ugliness into the Zope 3 stuff: the Five package has been the "ugly magnet" since it was first created, for exactly this reason. (Followups reset to zope-dev: the checkins list isn't supposed to be fore discussion). 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 iD8DBQFH7Wyk+gerLs4ltQ4RAugcAJ49/v6V+4aIZvVJBHeHfON4JbVLnQCg3Vfq 6EKI3wvuVOzYTPwjQV6df+Y= =P4UJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Zope Tests: 5 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Thu Mar 27 12:00:00 2008 UTC to Fri Mar 28 12:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 5 messages: 5 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Mar 27 21:50:29 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009315.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Mar 27 21:51:59 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009316.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Mar 27 21:53:29 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009317.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Mar 27 21:55:00 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009318.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Mar 27 21:56:30 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009319.html

1 0

[Zope 2.12] Eggification of Zope 2 - pros and cons?
by Andreas Jung 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

Hi, during the latest 'zope.publisher' thread on zope-dev I came up with the proposal to eggify the Zope core for the Zope 2.12 release. I would like to start a discussion about the pros and cons, risks and advantages of any eggification effort. Chris favors a 'big' Zope egg with some dependencies (like ZODB) stripped out. I would prefer a more broader approach. One of the reasons are company-internals modifications to the Zope core. Right now we maintain a more or less heavy modified version of Zope 2.8 in our repos (making Zope upgrades pretty hard). A better modularization would help us here. Another example: the Plone people maintained a Zope 2.10 branch with experimental ZODB blob support. With an eggified version of ZODB you could easily switch the eggs (easily spoken). So before promoting the eggification as an ultimate goal, let's discuss what we really need and want. A complete eggification just for the sake of eggs is possibly not the goal :-) Andreas

6 10

Re: SVN: z3c.schema2xml/branches/jw-experiment/ Fairly mechanical changes where IXMLGenerators are now multi
by Tres Seaver 27 Mar '08

27 Mar '08

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote: > Log message for revision 84963: > Fairly mechanical changes where IXMLGenerators are now multi > adapters on field and request (essentially making them into views). Why would I need or want a request to do XML serialization? If you have such a use case, can you make the request-dependent bits separate from the existing adapters, so that applications which use them in situations where there is no request in sight continue to work? 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 iD8DBQFH6/Sj+gerLs4ltQ4RAvA1AKDR0ImgPF5F/GxM/lrB2ma84efjwQCeIOy8 Bb+NqUVk+02n7WLqJI9z3ig= =6q2A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Packaging Zope for Fedora
by Timothy Selivanow 27 Mar '08

27 Mar '08

As the subject implies, I'm working on a package for Fedora. I've come across some missing dependencies, and some that are different versions. Because of the way that Python packages are put together (shared library environment), I'm trying to strip out everything that is not Zope specific (e.g. mechanize, docutils, etc.) that way Zope won't clobber already existing packages, and new packages won't clobber Zope. Here is my list (that I've discovered so far...) and some notes and questions. I would appreciate any information on resolving these. My list was taken from Zope-3.4.0c1/build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.5 (in my arch specific case...) after doing a `python install.py build` (side note, why is it called install.py and not setup.py?). BTrees -- Does not currently exist in Fedora as a separate package. Is this of Zope origin? (If not, where? Required version?) If Zope origin, is it useful outside of Zope? ClientForm -- This currently exists in Fedora (version 0.2.7) Diffing the directories and files reveals differences. What version is required for Zope? What about newer versions? twisted -- This currently exists in Fedora (version 2.4.0) Diffing the directories reveals that is it mostly compatible, however, missing some features (I have a list). What parts are required by Zope? Some of the missing parts are no longer being maintained, or are incompatible with newest Twisted (2.5.0). Thoughts? mechanize -- This currently exists in Fedora (version 0.1.6) Diffing the directories and files reveals differences. What version is required for Zope? What about newer versions? persistent -- Does not currently exist in Fedora as a separate package. Is this of Zope origin? (If not, where? Required version?) If Zope origin, is it useful outside of Zope? pytz -- This currently exists in Fedora (version 2006p) Diffing the directories and files reveals differences. What version is required for Zope? What about newer versions? The Zope versions do not have the .py extension. Possible problems with Zope if they do (i.e., lib resolving)? RestrictedPython -- Does not currently exist in Fedora as a separate package. Is this it? <http://pypi.python.org/pypi/RestrictedPython/3.4.2> Required version for Zope? What about newer versions? ThreadedAsync -- Does not currently exist in Fedora as a separate package. Is this of Zope origin? (If not, where? Required version?) If Zope origin, is it useful outside of Zope? transaction -- Does not currently exist in Fedora as a separate package. Is this of Zope origin? (If not, where? Required version?) If not Zope origin, is it useful outside of Zope? Also, there is an existing package in Fedora called python-zope-interface, version 3.0.1 I assume (in F8), and I'm wondering if it would be worth keeping separate (or at least available, updated, maybe with a Conflicts: zope) in Fedora and are there other parts of Zope (e.g. ZODB, ZEO) that would be useful by themselves? I'm sorry if this seems daunting (it is on my side ;) and/or demanding, but I would like this packaged the best possible way for both projects. Who knows, this might show up in future RHEL versions (maybe I'm delusional ;) Thank you for your time and patience. --Tim _________________________________________________________________________ / According to Kentucky state law, every person must take a bath at least \ \ once a year. / ------------------------------------------------------------------------- \ \ \ \ /\ ( ) .( o ).

7 11

Zope Tests: 5 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 27 Mar '08

27 Mar '08

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Mar 26 12:00:00 2008 UTC to Thu Mar 27 12:00:00 2008 UTC. There were 5 messages: 5 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.8 Python-2.3.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Mar 26 21:52:24 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009310.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.9 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Mar 26 21:53:55 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009311.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Mar 26 21:55:25 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009312.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Mar 26 21:56:55 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009313.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Mar 26 21:58:25 EDT 2008 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2008-March/009314.html

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

Zope-Dev March 2008