December 2009 - Zope-Dev

ZCA summary so far...
by Gary Poster 03 Dec '09

03 Dec '09

...from my perspective. = Things vaguely approaching consensus = == General == There's a consensus that changes to the ZCA need to be backwards compatible. The practical definition of that varies for different people. == Syntactic == === Tuple multi-adaptation === Example: IFoo((bar, baz)) == z.c.getMultiAdapter((bar, baz), IFoo) - It has the most consensus of any proposed change so far. - It is concerning because it breaks backwards compatibility in two real world use cases from the very small set of Zope users who actually watch zope-dev. There is a workaround spelling at least, but it is ugly (i.e., what was ``IFoo((bar, baz))`` will need to become ``IFoo(((bar, baz),))``). - It is easier to remember than ``z.c.getMultiAdapter((bar, baz), IFoo)`` (I always have to look up the order of arguments for getMultiAdapter myself) but not as easy to remember as ``IFoo(bar, baz)``. It introduces yet another spelling of the same thing (e.g., ``IFoo(bar)`` is the same as ``IFoo((bar,))``. == Utilities available from interfaces == As far as I can tell, no one is against this generally, and several people are for it. Some people are against the syntax that has been proposed for this that merges utilties and adapters (see "No consensus" section below). An alternate syntax was proposed involving a ``utility`` callable. This made the most sense when it was paired with an ``adapters`` (or ``factory`` or ``new`` or ``instance`` or ``create``) callable, which contradicts the consensus of the "tuple multi-adaptation" section above. = No consensus AFAICT = - Utilities and adapters should be merged. - We care significantly about new and casual users and perceive that the current API does not serve them well. - Adapters are usually used as factories, and utilities are used as instances, and it is valuable to present them that way. Related: the term "adapter" buys us little and costs us more than nothing among new and casual users. = Rejected = - Utilities should be called singletons.

3 7

improving the utility and adapter lookup APIs
by Martijn Faassen 03 Dec '09

03 Dec '09

Hi there, Reading the thread Chris McDonough started (and ended) about modifying the way utility registration works reminded me of the following thinking. It's quite independent and probably even antithetical to Chris's approach as it uses interfaces, but that's fine. The goal is to make it easier to look up certain componenty things. The goal is to have to import from "zope.component" as little as possible for lookups. Just import interfaces and you'll be done. I think it makes sense to make the lookup operation disappear into the "language" as much as we can make them. I know we've had this kind of discussion before, but let's get something working this time around. So I'm also looking for volunteers to help out with the implementation. I'm going to ignore registration APIs for now in this discussion. While they can be improved too, we have ZCML and martian-style registration systems that can handle that ok. Let's focus on lookup APIs first. We have a nice way to look up a single adapter: from foo import IFoo IFoo(object) Unfortunately, this breaks down when you want to look up a multiadapter: from foo import IFoo from zope import component component.getMultiAdapter((x, y), IFoo) That's an extra import and a lot more typing. We also have it break down when you want to look up a utility: from zope import component component.getUtility(IFoo) So let's look at ways to hook this up to interfaces. Adapter: IFoo(x) Adapter with default: IFoo(x, default=default) So far it's all supported. (I think. It's hard to find the code that supports this.. hints?) Named adapter: IFoo(x, name='something') Multiadapter: IFoo.multi(x, y) Multiadapter with default: IFoo.multi(x, y, default=default) Named multiadapter: IFoo.multi(x, y, name='something') Utility: IFoo.utility() [or possibly IFoo() instead?] Utility with default: IFoo.utility(default=default) [or IFoo(default=default)?] Named utility: IFoo.utility(name='something') [or IFoo(name='something')?] As a final thought, I don't like having to import 'implements' from zope.interface either. Since we're moving to Python 2.6 which supports class decorators, I'd like to see something like this become possible: @IFoo.implements class Foo(object): pass I know Jim had some objections towards implementation of this in an earlier discussion, but later changed his mind. So I'm going to look at Jim for hints about implementing this. :) If we do well we might all have this for Christmas. :) Thoughts? Regards, Martijn

21 55

Zope Tests: 6 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 03 Dec '09

03 Dec '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Dec 2 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Thu Dec 3 12:00:00 2009 UTC. There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Dec 2 20:38:22 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013125.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Dec 2 20:40:22 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013126.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Dec 2 20:42:22 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013127.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Dec 2 20:44:22 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013128.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Dec 2 20:46:22 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013129.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Dec 2 20:48:22 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013130.html

1 0

Releasing zope.browserresource
by Thomas Lotze 02 Dec '09

02 Dec '09

Could somebody please give me PyPI rights for zope.browserresource? I'd like to release a new version of it which includes the recent fixes to its dependencies. Thank you very much. -- Thomas

7 11

Zope Tests: 6 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 02 Dec '09

02 Dec '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Tue Dec 1 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Wed Dec 2 12:00:00 2009 UTC. There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Dec 1 20:38:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013119.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Dec 1 20:40:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013120.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Dec 1 20:42:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013121.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Dec 1 20:44:20 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013122.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Dec 1 20:46:20 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013123.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Dec 1 20:48:20 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-December/013124.html

1 0

z3c.recipe.i18n tests fail
by Christian Zagrodnick 02 Dec '09

02 Dec '09

Hi, the tests fail with the following error: Running zope.testing.testrunner.layer.UnitTests tests: Set up zope.testing.testrunner.layer.UnitTests in 0.000 seconds. Error in test /private/tmp/trunk/src/z3c/recipe/i18n/README.txt Traceback (most recent call last): File "/Users/zagy/development/python/lib/python2.6/unittest.py", line 270, in run self.setUp() File "/Users/zagy/development/eggs/zope.testing-3.8.3-py2.6.egg/zope/testing/doctest.py", line 2289, in setUp self._dt_setUp(test) File "/private/tmp/trunk/src/z3c/recipe/i18n/tests.py", line 43, in setUp zc.buildout.testing.install('zope.app.publisher', test) File "/Users/zagy/development/eggs/zc.buildout-1.4.2-py2.6.egg/zc/buildout/testing.py", line 464, in install if dist.location.endswith('.egg'): AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'location' I actually have no idea why this is happening. Anybody got a clue? Regards, -- Christian Zagrodnick · cz(a)gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 4 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development

2 3

Need help
by Roopesh P Raj 01 Dec '09

01 Dec '09

I have to use a logging framework in my zope product. The logging framework makes it mandatory to use the same object instance to fire various logging calls (like log start, log end). I want to store the object instance somewhere so that I can use it from any module in my zope product. I tried to store it in context._ProductContext__app. There are two patch classes of httprequest and httpresponse inside which the context is not available. How do I do this in Zope-2.8.8 Thanks Roopesh

2 1

Object schema field validation
by Markus Kemmerling 01 Dec '09

01 Dec '09

I stumbled upon a problem with Object schema field validation. The problem occurs, e.g., if the the Object field's schema itself contains a Choice field with a dynamically computed vocabulary. For the latter to validate correctly the field must be bound to the instance. But the Object field validation code in zope.schema._fields._validate_fields validates the attributes of the Object field instance without binding them first: def _validate_fields(schema, value, errors=None): ... try: attribute = schema[name] if IField.providedBy(attribute): # validate attributes that are fields attribute.validate(getattr(value, name)) except ValidationError, error: ... Replacing the line attribute.validate(getattr(value, name)) with field = attribute.bind(value) field.validate(getattr(value, name)) fixes the problem. Looks like a bug to me. Regards, Markus Kemmerling

2 1

Zope Tests: 6 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 01 Dec '09

01 Dec '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Mon Nov 30 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Tue Dec 1 12:00:00 2009 UTC. There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Nov 30 20:38:25 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/013113.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Nov 30 20:40:25 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/013114.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Nov 30 20:42:25 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/013115.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Nov 30 20:44:26 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/013116.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Nov 30 20:46:26 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/013117.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Nov 30 20:48:26 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/013118.html

1 0