April 2009 - Zope-Dev

TypeError: ('argument list must be a tuple') when trying load object from old zodb in Zope 2.12.0a1
by Chris Withers 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

Hi All, Any ideas what this means or where it's coming from? Module ZODB.Connection, line 808, in setstate Module ZODB.Connection, line 876, in _setstate Module ZODB.serialize, line 604, in setGhostState Module ZODB.serialize, line 597, in getState TypeError: ('argument list must be a tuple', <class 'Products.ParsedXML.DOM.Core.Document'>, None) cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

1 2

Zope Tests: 6 OK, 2 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Apr 15 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Thu Apr 16 12:00:00 2009 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests. Test failures ------------- Subject: FAILED (failures=1) : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 15 20:52:43 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011477.html Subject: FAILED (failures=1) : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 15 20:58:47 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011480.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 15 20:48:40 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011475.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 15 20:50:43 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011476.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.5.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 15 20:54:43 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011478.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.1 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 15 20:56:46 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011479.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.5.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 15 21:00:47 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011481.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.1 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 15 21:02:47 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011482.html

1 0

Zope 2.12: versions thingy in Control_Panel
by Chris Withers 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

Hi All, A little gotcha in 2.12 is that, because Versions are now gone, you get some weird errors when you try and view the ZMI using an older Data.fs. The following fixed it for me: >>> cp = app.Control_Panel >>> cp._objects = tuple([i for i in app._objects if i['id']!='Versions']) >>> import transaction >>> transaction.get().commit() Hope this helps! Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

3 2

iterating over class without __iter__ but with __getitem__ raises AttributeError:__iter__
by Chris Withers 15 Apr '09

15 Apr '09

Hi All, The context for this is trying to get ParsedXML 1.5 running on Zope 2.12 under Python 2.5 (don't ask why!) Anyway, ParsedXML has a class: class ManageableNodeList(ManageableWrapper, DOMProxy.NodeListProxy, Acquisition.Implicit): "A wrapper around a DOM NodeList." meta_type = "Manageable NodeList" # redefine to get back the [] syntax with acquisition, eh? def __getslice__(self, i, j): return self.wrapNodeList(self._node.__getslice__(i,j)) # redefine to get back the [] syntax with acquisition, eh? def __getitem__(self, i): return self.wrapDOMObj(self._node.__getitem__(i)) If you try and iterate over an instance of this class, you get an AttributeError: __iter__. This doesn't make a lot of sense, since you *don't* get an error like that if you iterate over an instance of: class X: def __getitem__(self,i): return 1 I'm wondering there's some ExtensionClass or similar weirdness happening here? (It didn't used to happen under Zope 2.9/Python 2.4) cheers, Chris PS: I have a f'ing horrible workaround for how: ... def __iter__(self): return SillyIterator(self) class SillyIterator: def __init__(self,mnl): self.mnl = mnl self.i = 0 def next(self): try: e = self.mnl[self.i] except IndexError: raise StopIteration self.i+=1 return e -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

5 16

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: Zope/trunk/ Let the <permission /> directive auto-register permissions that don't exist already
by Tres Seaver 15 Apr '09

15 Apr '09

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Martin Aspeli wrote: > Log message for revision 99146: > Let the <permission /> directive auto-register permissions that don't exist already This kind of test is a "poster child" for why doctests with lots of output are fragile: even though it uses pprint, it *still* fails on different Python versions (i.e., it is breaking on Python 2.4). This test needs to be rewritten either as a traditional unittest (my preference), or the assertions about the state need to be rewritten in "fine grained" form. > +def test_register_permission(): > + """This test demonstrates that if the <permission /> directive is used > + to create a permission that does not already exist, it is created on > + startup, with roles defaulting to Manager. > + > + >>> from zope.app.testing.placelesssetup import setUp, tearDown > + >>> setUp() > + > + First, we need to configure the relevant parts of Five. > + > + >>> import Products.Five > + >>> from Products.Five import zcml > + >>> zcml.load_config('meta.zcml', Products.Five) > + >>> zcml.load_config('permissions.zcml', Products.Five) > + > + We can now register a permission in ZCML: > + > + >>> configure_zcml = ''' > + ... <configure xmlns="http://namespaces.zope.org/zope"> > + ... > + ... <permission > + ... id="Products.Five.tests.DummyPermission" > + ... title="Five: Dummy permission" > + ... /> > + ... > + ... </configure> > + ... ''' > + >>> zcml.load_string(configure_zcml) > + > + The permission will be made available globally, with default role set > + of ('Manager',). > + > + >>> from pprint import pprint > + >>> pprint(self.app.rolesOfPermission('Five: Dummy permission')) > + [{'name': 'Anonymous', 'selected': ''}, > + {'name': 'Authenticated', 'selected': ''}, > + {'name': 'Manager', 'selected': 'SELECTED'}, > + {'name': 'Owner', 'selected': ''}] > + > + Let's also ensure that permissions are not overwritten if they exist > + already: > + > + >>> from AccessControl.Permission import _registeredPermissions > + >>> import Products > + >>> _registeredPermissions['Five: Other dummy'] = 1 > + >>> Products.__ac_permissions__ += (('Five: Other dummy', (), (),),) > + >>> self.app.manage_permission('Five: Other dummy', roles=['Anonymous']) > + > + >>> configure_zcml = ''' > + ... <configure xmlns="http://namespaces.zope.org/zope"> > + ... > + ... <permission > + ... id="Products.Five.tests.OtherDummy" > + ... title="Five: Other dummy" > + ... /> > + ... > + ... </configure> > + ... ''' > + >>> zcml.load_string(configure_zcml) > + > + >>> from pprint import pprint > + >>> pprint(self.app.rolesOfPermission('Five: Other dummy')) > + [{'name': 'Anonymous', 'selected': 'SELECTED'}, > + {'name': 'Authenticated', 'selected': ''}, > + {'name': 'Manager', 'selected': ''}, > + {'name': 'Owner', 'selected': ''}] > + > + >>> tearDown() > + """ > + > def test_suite(): > from Testing.ZopeTestCase import ZopeDocTestSuite > return ZopeDocTestSuite() 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 iD8DBQFJ5fc7+gerLs4ltQ4RAsPyAJ4jmnMes8zQ4z3Kwu41YPYJkJWCqgCeNwOj Afe708/o+B4wQjzz4j/w2Xw= =Qvq/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 4

who wants to maintain Zope 3?
by Martijn Faassen 15 Apr '09

15 Apr '09

Hi there, Is anyone interested in maintaining Zope 3? With Zope 3 I mean: * the thing with the ZMI - do you care about the ZMI? * the thing that can be installed as a particular development platform - do you care about the installation story for Zope 3? (as opposed to Grok or your own application's?) * the thing that has some kind of documentation website - do you care about providing documentation for Zope 3 as opposed to documentation for Grok or individual libraries? People who are interested in these aspects please speak up, so we can figure out what this all means for the future of Zope 3. If nobody is interested, we should perhaps stop talking about it entirely. If people are just interested in the ZMI, perhaps we should form a ZMI project. What I'm *not* talking about is: * maintaining, documenting and installing Grok. * maintaining and documenting any particular Zope Toolkit library (outside of those bits that do ZMI-stuff, those aren't supposed to be in the toolkit) We know people are interested in doing all that. Regards, Martijn

16 57

Re: [Zope-dev] who wants to maintain Zope 3?
by Fabio Tranchitella 15 Apr '09

15 Apr '09

Hello, * 2009-04-13 12:50, Hermann Himmelbauer wrote: > > +1, to declaring Zope 3 dead. That should allow us to refactor the > > remaining packages much more aggressively and reduce the dependencies. > > -1 from my standpoint. Two of my projects are fully based on the Zope 3 > server, and switching to something else would be quite some pain. I fully agree: our company is based on zope3 technology, and we have at least three big deployments based on zope3 (yes, the application server) using ZODB and PostgreSQL/storm. I do not know in the details what would it mean to switch to the zope toolkit/repoze/whatever is fashionable today, but I suppose it would be quite painful for us. If the question was "who is interested in zope3, the application server, and willing to maintain it", I'd answer "me". Best regards. -- Fabio Tranchitella http://www.kobold.it Free Software Developer and Consultant http://www.tranchitella.it _____________________________________________________________________ 1024D/7F961564, fpr 5465 6E69 E559 6466 BF3D 9F01 2BF8 EE2B 7F96 1564

6 9

who wants to maintain the Zope 3 ZMI?
by Martijn Faassen 15 Apr '09

15 Apr '09

Hi there, In the whole discussion about Zope 3 I saw very few people speak up for the Zope 3 ZMI. So, who finds the Zope 3 ZMI useful? What parts of it do you find useful? Are you interested in helping maintain it? Note that I'm talking about the concrete Zope 3 ZMI here, not the general concept of the ZMI. I think there are quite a few useful concepts surrounding the ZMI, but the Zope 3 ZMI isn't that good at making any of these concepts work right now, in my opinion. If we get a consensus that the ZMI in Zope 3 isn't actually used a lot, we could take a lot more drastic action in removing it from our codebase than we've done before. If people are using it, we shouldn't do that of course. Regards, Martijn

6 13

Zope Tests: 6 OK, 2 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 15 Apr '09

15 Apr '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Tue Apr 14 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Wed Apr 15 12:00:00 2009 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests. Test failures ------------- Subject: FAILED (failures=1) : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Apr 14 20:50:37 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011469.html Subject: FAILED (failures=1) : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Apr 14 20:56:37 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011472.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Apr 14 20:46:28 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011467.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Apr 14 20:48:37 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011468.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.5.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Apr 14 20:52:37 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011470.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.1 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Apr 14 20:54:37 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011471.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.5.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Apr 14 20:58:37 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011473.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.1 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Apr 14 21:00:38 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-April/011474.html

1 0

Proposal: Align Zope 2 and Zope 3 permissions
by Martin Aspeli 14 Apr '09

14 Apr '09

Hi all, For a while now, people have had to contend with two ways of doing certain things, depending on whether the code they are working with is in "Zope 2 land" or "Zope 3 land". We're getting closer to a world where people don't need to be so intimately aware of the differences, especially since the __parent__ pointer work was merged, and some of the unification of page templates. However, we still have to do a lot of explaining in the realm of permissions. Five installs a Zope 3 security checker that checks against Zope 2 security. It does so by treating the title of a Zope 3 style IPermission utility as a Zope 2 permission string. This works well, and has allowed us to create valid Zope 3 permissions for the core Zope 2 and CMF permissions (e.g. zope2.View, cmf.ModifyPortalContent) for use in views and the like. However, it's not clear to new users where to use the Zope 3 style dotted name and where to use the Zope 2 permission string. As a rule of thumb, the rules are something like: - In ZCML (or a grok.require() directive) use the Zope 3 name - In code, e.g. when doing a checkPermission() call, use the Zope 2 name - With GenericSetup's rolemap.xml, use the Zope 2 name The waters are muddied further by components that require a permission to be listed or provided explicitly. Some use the Zope 2 name, some use the Zope 3 name. The other problem is that a <permission /> ZCML directive does not actually register a Zope 2 style permission, it merely maps an existing permission to a new name. Since Zope 2 permissions spring into existence in difficult-to-explain ways, that causes a lot of confusion. Finally, there is not total parity between Zope 2 security and Zope 3 security. Zope 2 cannot protect 'property set', for example. To this end, Five throws exceptions if you use a ZCML <class /> directive with set_attributes or or set_schema. Whilst this makes sense, it makes it harder to re-use existing packages that do have that kind of protection in place. Since the concept does not exist in Zope 2, I think it makes sense to ignore this with a warning, rather than error. So, here is what I'd like to propose, ideally for Zope 2.12: 1) Use an event handler to ensure that any <permission /> declared in ZCML actually creates a valid, Zope 2 permission. I have working code for this here which we could put in Products.Five with ease. http://dev.plone.org/collective/browser/collective.autopermission/trunk/col… Benefits: Creating new permissions becomes more predictable. Risks: None obvious. The event handler will not override permissions that already exist. 2) Emit a warning instead of an error in Five's handler for the <class /> directive when set_attributes or set_schema are used. Benefits: Easier to re-use existing packages Risks: The attributes won't actually be protected. However, since Zope 2 doesn't have the concept of protecting 'set' (or security proxies) then I'm not sure there's a problem of expectation. 3) Change the Permission class in AccessControl so that it tries to look up an IPermission utility and use the title of that utility as the permission name, falling back on the current behaviour of using the passed permission name directly. Benefits: Should transparently allow any invocation of the Zope 2 API to use Zope 3 permission names, allowing us to document that the dotted permission name is the canonical name everywhere. Risks: Performance overhead of doing utility lookups. May result in name clashes, but since the permission name is a dotted name and the Zope 2 permission name isn't, I think it's extremely unlikely that this would actually happen in practice. Thoughts? Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

7 12