April 2010 - Zope-Dev

Manuel Beta
by Benji York 14 Jan '11

14 Jan '11

I've just released the first beta of Manuel, my next-generation doctest project. Being that zope-dev has some of the most well-informed users of doctest (and some of the most well-informed non-users of doctest), I'd like to gather feedback from this group before making an announcement to the wider world. Manuel is available from PyPI (http://pypi.python.org/pypi/manuel) with docs, details, and examples at http://packages.python.org/manuel/. I'm interested in any feedback and/or questions you may have be it technical, documentation, or "marketing" (i.e., how do I describe what Manuel does and what benefits it has). -- Benji York Senior Software Engineer Zope Corporation

5 12

zope.dublincore and zope.copypastemove not compatible?
by Michael Howitz 14 Sep '10

14 Sep '10

Hi, I found something strange in metadata when copying a persistent object. My situation is the following: I have a container with some elements inside. I create a copy of this container using zope.copypastemove.ObjectCopier(my_container).copyTo(my_container.__parent__) (Actually I use zope.copypastemove.interfaces.IObjectCopier(my_container) but this calls the adapter mentioned above.) Side note: Is this the right way to copy an persistent object nowadays? This happens tho dublin core metadata then: As zope.dublincore.timeannotators.CreatedAnnotator is subscribed to zope.lifecycleevent.IObjectCreatedEvent it gets called as the ObjectCopiedEvent is a subclass of ObjectCreatedEvent. The copy of the container gets a new creation date set in its metadata. But zope.copypastemove.dispatchToSublocations calls the subscribers for the sublocations using zope.component.subscribers((sub, event), None) So the zope.dublincore.timeannotators.CreatedAnnotator does not get called as it is not registered for (object, event) but only for (event,). This leads to a strange situation: the metadata of the copied container get updated but not the metadata of its contents. This behavior has not changed since version 3.4.0 which was about 2,5 years ago. I think this is a long-standing bug and it should it be fixed in zope.dublincore by registering the subscribers for (object, event)? (Additionally or exclusively, I'm not sure.) Any thoughts? Yours sincerely, -- Michael Howitz · mh(a)gocept.com · software developer gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 8 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development

1 3

Retire zope3-checkins list
by Baiju M 09 Aug '10

09 Aug '10

Hi, What about retiring zope3-checkins list ? Regards, Baiju M

3 3

vocabularies missing wihtout zope.app.schema
by Roger 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Hi all I'm not happy with the current vocabulary registry concept. Some zope.* packages provide vocabularies as zope.schema.interfaces.IVocabularyFactory utilities. The current zope.schema vocabulary registry without the patch located in zope.app.schema can't lookup such vocabulary factory utilities. Which concept should the ZTK use? The plain vocabulary from zope.schema.vocabulary or the enhanced component lookupbased concept defined in zope.app.schema.vocabulary? Any hints how we should improve that? Regards Roger Ineichen _____________________________ END OF MESSAGE

6 7

zope.app.authentication
by Souheil CHELFOUH 02 Jul '10

02 Jul '10

Hello guys, I'm coding some stuff, using zope.app.authentication and this package appears to do too many things, in my opinion. Would it be wise to cut off some of the functionalities ? The pure PAU components could go in a dedicated package, like zope.pluggableauthservice The whole handling of principals, groups and folder makes it a bit hard to read and introduces a lot of redundancy if we wish to roll our own things. What do you guys think ? Cheers - Souheil

5 13

Poposal: Split zope.app.preference into two packages
by Michael Howitz 12 Jun '10

12 Jun '10

Hi, I propose to split zope.app.preference into two separate packages: - zope.preference -- which contains the ZMI independent stuff, - zope.app.preference -- which contains the ZMI stuff and depends on zope.preference. By ZMI stuff I mean the views and page templates which depend on ZMI to be displayed. As there are no tests for these views I'll write some testbrowser tests first. Later on there might be a package z3c.preference which integrates zope.preference using z3c.pagelet. Risks: I do not see any. Any objections, hints, …? Yours sincerely, -- Michael Howitz · mh(a)gocept.com · software developer gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 8 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development

1 1

zope.server: "Exception during task" logging
by Christian Zagrodnick 11 Jun '10

11 Jun '10

Hi, zope.server logs the "Exception during task" message to the root logger. So there is no (easy/useful) way to filter that. I'd like to change this logging to a zope.server logger. (i.e. using logging.getLogger(...)) Objections? -- 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

windows binaries
by Adam GROSZER 05 May '10

05 May '10

Hello, How do you used to build binaries for windowze? I mean which compilers do you use? mingw32? MS? Ohhh and don't forget win64 ;-) and various python version, like from 2.4 up to 3.1. -- Best regards, Adam GROSZER mailto:agroszer@gmail.com -- Quote of the day: The chief trouble with the church is that you and I are in it. - Charles H. Heimsath

3 5

Zope Tests: 10 OK, 6 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 02 May '10

02 May '10

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Apr 28 12:00:00 2010 UTC to Thu Apr 29 12:00:00 2010 UTC. There were 16 messages: 6 from Zope Tests, 9 from ccomb at free.fr, 1 from ct at gocept.com. Test failures ------------- Subject: FAILED: Repository policy check found errors in 670 projects From: ct at gocept.com Date: Wed Apr 28 21:17:52 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014161.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.5.2 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Wed Apr 28 23:00:24 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014174.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.6.4 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Wed Apr 28 23:00:25 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014173.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.4.6 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Wed Apr 28 23:00:25 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014172.html Subject: FAILED : Zope 3.4.1 KGS / Python2.4.6 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Thu Apr 29 00:22:35 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014175.html Subject: FAILED : Zope 3.4.1 KGS / Python2.5.2 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Thu Apr 29 00:46:07 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014176.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 28 21:29:34 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014162.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 28 21:31:34 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014163.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 28 21:33:34 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014164.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 28 21:35:34 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014165.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 28 21:37:34 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014166.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Apr 28 21:39:34 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014167.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.4.6 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Wed Apr 28 22:00:44 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014168.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.5.2 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Wed Apr 28 22:00:45 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014169.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.6.4 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Wed Apr 28 22:00:46 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014170.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.7b1 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Wed Apr 28 22:00:46 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014171.html

3 4

Version bump question? Bikeshed here.
by Lennart Regebro 01 May '10

01 May '10

I updated zc.receipe.testrunner to use zope.testrunner instead of zope.testing.testrunner. Initial testing has shown that this should be compatible, and although the code changes are minor, it's potentially unexpected. So should we release it as 2.0.0 or 1.3.0? 2.0.0 seems too radical to me, but then again I often say to others to not be afraid of version numbers. :) Opinions? -- Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64

3 5