April 2010 - Zope-Dev

RFC: Proposed new style for documenting and testing ZTK packages
by Tres Seaver 27 Apr '10

27 Apr '10

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This kind of goes with Lennart's frustration about trying to port the ZTK packages, or a core subset, to Python 3. I would like to see the ZTK packages have really excellent documentation, as well as 100% test coverage. I think we need to look at refactoring how the testing story is done to get both needs satisfied: trying to achieve both with a single set of doctests is pretty near impossible: - - Testing setup and teardown code obscures the narrative flow / intent of the documentation. - - Edge case testing *really* obscures the same. - - Test coverage suffers, because it is hard to write edge-case tests in doctest. - - Porting the doctests where people have tried to juggle both goals across Python versions is a mess. The refactoring I would like to see happen is to move the main narrative documentation into a separate, Sphinx-driven 'docs' directory in each ZTK package. As part of this move, we can start adding some of the really nice Sphinx features (cross references, indexing, auto-generation of API reference information, etc.). We can still leave the "main line" of the code illustrated using doctest-style blocks: Sphinx has nice support for testing those blocks *while building the docs*. At the end of this part of the change, each package would have a much improved documentation set, with tested examples. At the end of the process, we would be able to put the docs for each package into an "intersphinx" tree underneath the main ZTK docs, which could serve as the gateway into them. The trickier testing bits we would re-write as super thorough, no shortcuts-taken unit tests: one testcase class per class (or API function) under test, at least one method per class-under-test method, with more preferred to get all code paths / preconditions covered. The goal here would be to comment out the doctests from the test_suites and get the code to 100% coverage using pure unit tests. Meanwhile, the doctests would be refactored into the Sphinx documentation, losing all the bits which obscure their intent as documentation. I would say that the risks here are slight, given that aiming for 100% test coverage is likely to catch any oversights made during porting to the new style. The amount of work for any given package is fairly-well contained, I think: most of the effort will be in reverse-engineering the intent of the "edge-case" tests. I made a sketch at what these changes would look for the zope.event package like on a branch in Subversion: http://svn.zope.org/zope.event/branches/tseaver-new_style_docs I select zope.event largely because it is small enough that the scope of the structural changes wouldn't be lost in the diffs for the actual tests (and also because I didn't want to do the work for a bigger package before getting feedback). The rendered docs from that branch are here: http://palladion.com/static/zope.event-docs/ I pushed the bzr branch to Launchpad, to let you see the kinds of changes I made to get there (our viewcvs story is not nearly as easy to review as the Launchpad changeset view): https://code.launchpad.net/~tseaver/zope.event/new_style_docs I am attaching an annotated diff for those who would prefer to see the changes in that format. I would say that this cleanup effort should start at the "bottom" layers of the ZTK, dependency-wise (zope.interface, zope.component, etc.) and move "upwards" (in the depenency sense) over time. Thoughts? Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver(a)palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkvJEakACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ6X/wCgueT8RD10bKrM4OInF0sIj/Tk rs4AnAiQlBWZoHd35ti0tPlae/JsVgvC =K8N0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

15 37

pypi access to zope.browserresource, zope.browsermenu
by Martijn Faassen 27 Apr '10

27 Apr '10

Hi there, Could someone give me and Hanno pypi access to zope.browserresource and zope.browsermenu? Our pypi usernames are: faassen hannosch Regards, Martijn

3 4

z3c.formjs on win32 + KGS
by Adam GROSZER 27 Apr '10

27 Apr '10

Hello, While trying to test the KGS on *win32*, I have the problem that python-cjson, a dependency of z3c.formjs won't compile. Even better, looking at pypi: """ jmillikin (2009-11-23, 0 points): Please don't use cjson. It is abandoned, has numerous bugs related to character escaping and Unicode, and doesn't support many features available in other JSON libraries. """ I see there some options: * push the author of python-cjson to fix it (seems to be unresponsive since 2009-09-01) * Throw out z3c.formjs from the KGS well, currently it's known-not-good on win32 * Use an other JSON converter (simplejson?) * Fork python-cjson, it's LGPL, so I guess the source should not go to svn.zope.org votes? For now I'll comment z3c.formjs to be able to proceed with the KGS. -- Best regards, Adam GROSZER mailto:agroszer@gmail.com -- Quote of the day: About all some men accomplish in life is to send a son to Harvard.

3 3

Zope Tests: 10 OK, 6 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 27 Apr '10

27 Apr '10

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Mon Apr 26 12:00:00 2010 UTC to Tue Apr 27 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: Mon Apr 26 21:18:55 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014129.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.5.2 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 23:13:57 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014140.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.4.6 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 23:14:07 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014141.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.6.4 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 23:14:11 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014142.html Subject: FAILED : Zope 3.4.1 KGS / Python2.4.6 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Tue Apr 27 00:22:02 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014143.html Subject: FAILED : Zope 3.4.1 KGS / Python2.5.2 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Tue Apr 27 00:44:43 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014144.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Apr 26 21:29:29 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014130.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Apr 26 21:31:29 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014131.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Apr 26 21:33:29 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014132.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Apr 26 21:35:29 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014133.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Apr 26 21:37:29 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014134.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Mon Apr 26 21:39:29 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014135.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.4.6 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 22:01:23 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014136.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.7b1 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 22:01:29 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014137.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.6.4 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 22:01:29 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014138.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.5.2 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 22:01:30 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014139.html

1 0

Agenda for today's IRC meeting (3pm UTC on #zope)
by Christian Theune 27 Apr '10

27 Apr '10

Hi everyone, another weekly meeting is coming up today and I hope see you again around 3pm UTC at #zope at freenode. (That's a bit less than 4 hours from now on.) Last week's summary is here: https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/attachments/20100421/b1da5f70/atta…. Agenda ------ - State of bug tracking/LP usage - zope.app - emptying out Zope 3 bugs - dealing with the zope.org project group - Review bug day outcome - Windows machines status update Ongoing issues -------------- Those issues are currently ongoing. We don't have to discuss them. We just need to follow up on them eventually. - Bug tracking - Monitoring tracker status (Charlie Clark, ctheune) - Towards a ZTK release - Establishing ZTK release engineering team (Z2, grok, BB) - Documentation - Release scope - Test runners / nightly builds - Windows machines - Meta - How to organize open issues in the long run (Blueprints? Other tool? Continue text files?) - Find second person to run the weekly meetings Horizon ------- These items are currently tracked on the horizon. We won't discuss them at this meeting, but we'll get to them at some point: - Pondering *some* (re-)structuring of the ZTK to allow for better maintenance/release management/communication/marketing. (Chris McDonough) Christian -- Christian Theune · ct(a)gocept.com gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development

1 0

Zope Tests: 10 OK, 6 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 26 Apr '10

26 Apr '10

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Sun Apr 25 12:00:00 2010 UTC to Mon Apr 26 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: Sun Apr 25 21:16:21 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014113.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.4.6 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 23:13:57 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014124.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.5.2 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 23:14:06 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014125.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.6.4 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 23:14:08 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014126.html Subject: FAILED : Zope 3.4.1 KGS / Python2.4.6 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 00:22:40 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014127.html Subject: FAILED : Zope 3.4.1 KGS / Python2.5.2 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Mon Apr 26 00:45:03 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014128.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Apr 25 21:50:37 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014114.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Apr 25 21:52:37 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014115.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Apr 25 21:54:37 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014116.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Apr 25 21:56:37 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014117.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Apr 25 21:58:37 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014118.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Apr 25 22:00:42 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014119.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.5.2 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 22:00:49 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014121.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.4.6 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 22:00:49 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014120.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.7b1 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 22:00:52 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014122.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.6.4 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 22:00:52 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014123.html

3 2

ZTK community packages
by Christophe Combelles 26 Apr '10

26 Apr '10

Hi! I believe packages such as z3c.form, z3c.macro, z3c.template, z3c.pagelet (and many others) are among the most important packages. I wonder why they are not included in the ZTK? I always end up using them, I believe they should even be part of the core ZTK. If they are not part of the core, I would like them to be part of a *community.cfg* list. There already is a community.cfg list in BlueBream, but I don't like having many foobartoolkit in the wild, with many package lists to maintain. It's already difficult enough to maintain just 1 list for the zopetoolkit. Let's focus on it. regards, Christophe

5 8

Zope Tests: 10 OK, 6 Failed
by Zope Tests Summarizer 25 Apr '10

25 Apr '10

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Sat Apr 24 12:00:00 2010 UTC to Sun Apr 25 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: Sat Apr 24 21:16:22 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014097.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.5.2 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sat Apr 24 23:13:51 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014108.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.4.6 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sat Apr 24 23:14:22 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014109.html Subject: FAILED : ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.6.4 Linux 32bit From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sat Apr 24 23:14:27 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014110.html Subject: FAILED : Zope 3.4.1 KGS / Python2.4.6 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 00:22:15 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014111.html Subject: FAILED : Zope 3.4.1 KGS / Python2.5.2 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sun Apr 25 00:56:48 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014112.html Tests passed OK --------------- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Apr 24 21:39:47 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014098.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Apr 24 21:41:49 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014099.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Apr 24 21:43:51 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014100.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Apr 24 21:45:51 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014101.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Apr 24 21:47:51 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014102.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.4 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sat Apr 24 21:49:57 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014103.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.6.4 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sat Apr 24 22:00:51 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014104.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.7b1 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sat Apr 24 22:00:54 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014105.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.5.2 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sat Apr 24 22:00:54 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014106.html Subject: OK : BlueBream template / Python2.4.6 32bit linux From: ccomb at free.fr Date: Sat Apr 24 22:00:55 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-April/014107.html

1 0

buildbot for the KGS 3.4.1
by Christophe Combelles 24 Apr '10

24 Apr '10

Here is one (only linux 32bits) http://buildbot.afpy.org/kgs3.4.1/waterfall

1 0

Re: [Zope-dev] mechanize 0.1.7b
by Adam GROSZER 24 Apr '10

24 Apr '10

Hello John, Yep, all good. Thanks! Saturday, April 24, 2010, 6:52:31 PM, you wrote: JJL> On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Adam GROSZER wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I know that version is rather old, but one of our previous release >> (zope KGS 3.4.0) still uses it. >> The pypi page http://pypi.python.org/pypi/mechanize/0.1.7b points to >> http://wwwsearch.sourceforge.net/mechanize/src/mechanize-0.1.7b.tar.gz >> which seems to be a 404. >> >> Could you please upload this version to pypi? JJL> [...] JJL> Sorry, I've put it back -- is it working OK for you now? JJL> John -- Best regards, Adam GROSZER mailto:agroszer@gmail.com -- Quote of the day: I could well believe that it is God's intention, since we have refused milder remedies, to compel [Christians] into unity, by persecution even. Satan is without doubt nothing else than a hammer in the hand of a benevolent and severe God. - C.S. Lewis

1 0