- Zope-Dev - Zope lists

ZEO 1.0b6 released
by Jeremy Hylton 04 Apr '02

04 Apr '02

I have just released ZEO 1.0 beta 6. It's been almost six months since the last beta release, so it was surely time. This release fixes two bugs that Zope Corp. has recently run into in the field. See http://www.zope.org/Products/ZEO/. Here are the changes: - Fixed a bug that could cause the server to stop committing transactions for a storage. The bug occurred under the following circumstances: - A synchronous client made a tpc_begin() request. - The request arrived while another transaction was in progress. - The other transaction finished. - The client closed the connection or an unexpected error occurred while the server was handling the client's tpc_begin(). The fix is to make the code to resume a waiting transaction robust in the face of disconnects and errors. - Fixed bugs in the storage server and the trigger module that caused the server to fail with uncaught exceptions when it received a signal. The start script installs several signal handlers, so the server should not fail when those signals are received. These bugs might have occurred in other circumstances, too. Note: The signal handlers are not particularly useful with the default zLOG backend (STUPID_LOG_FILE). - Upgrade to license to ZPL 2.0 I expect to release ZEO 1.0 final next week. I'll also take this opportunity to mention future ZEO development plans. I plan to make a ZEO 1.1 release sometime this month. This release will add some debugging support and a few minor features that have proved useful in high-volume ZEO clusters. I also plan to make an alpha release of ZEO 2.0. ZEO 2 is a partial re-implementation of ZEO that provides a new RPC protocol between the ZEO clients and server. The new RPC protocol will make it possible to extend ZEO with new features and to make changes that will improve performance. ZEO 2.0 alpha 1 will be a baseline that provides the new protocol, but probably none of the features. If there are any crucial feature requests for ZEO 1.1, now is the time to make them (patches preferred :-). Otherwise, new features will be postponed to ZEO 2.0. Jeremy

1 0

Splitter problem #3
by Petter Enholm 04 Apr '02

04 Apr '02

Hi, Like other people on the list I get problems with the splitter. I checked out latest version of Zope from cvs today, compiled wo_pcgi.py and started Zope. Running nicely. Then I shut down Zope and copied in a Data.fs file from Zope 2.4.3 - which by the way runs nicely on Zope 2.5.1-b1. When I now attempt to restart Zope I get several errors, among others this one: 2002-04-03T18:01:41 ERROR(200) Zope Couldn't install PageTemplates Traceback (innermost last): File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/OFS/Application.py, line 639, in install_product (Object: Zope) (Info: PageTemplates) File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/Products/PageTemplates/__init__.py, line 28, in initialize File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/Products/PageTemplates/ZopePageTemplate.py, line 342, in initialize File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/App/ProductContext.py, line 318, in registerHelp File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/App/ProductContext.py, line 244, in registerHelpTopic File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/OFS/ObjectManager.py, line 290, in _setObject (Object: Help) File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/HelpSys/HelpTopic.py, line 79, in manage_afterAdd (Object: PageTemplate_Edit.stx) File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/HelpSys/HelpTopic.py, line 92, in index_object (Object: PageTemplate_Edit.stx) File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/Products/ZCatalog/ZCatalog.py, line 476, in catalog_object (Object: catalog) File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/Products/ZCatalog/Catalog.py, line 366, in catalogObject File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/Products/PluginIndexes/TextIndex/TextIndex.py, line 306, in index_object (Object: SearchableText) File /usr/local/Zope/lib/python/ZODB/Connection.py, line 505, in setstate SystemError: Failed to import class Splitter from module Products.PluginIndexes.TextIndex.Splitter.ZopeSplitter I checked the directory containing ZopeSplitter and I saw that the __init__.py file was empy. I copied on the one from Zope-2.5.1-b1 - and Zope starts without problems. I am curious now, what is the problem here ? Can I continue running with the __init__.py from older Zope version or is there other things that must be done to my installation. Best regards Petter Enholm Snapper

3 4

Better tracebacks proposal
by Shane Hathaway 03 Apr '02

03 Apr '02

I've created a proposal that details what I'm working on to improve tracebacks for Zope 2.6. (A lot of the work is also going into Zope 3X.) http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/BetterTracebacks Everyone who is interested in improving Zope's tracebacks, please review the proposal and comment. Shane

1 0

Sat�l�k Daire (Sahibinden)
by Recep Do�an 03 Apr '02

03 Apr '02

1 0

Re: [Zope-dev] ding, dong, the segfault is dead. Patch attached
by Anthony Baxter 03 Apr '02

03 Apr '02

> Nice to hear. Is there any change that this patch will be included in > the next Zope Binary release? Well, there will be a python 2.1.3 release for this fix, so I'd imagine that there will be a binary release from that... > The beast is killed! Finally! :) do I hear the sound of the next killer mongrel bug warming up, just offstage? Anthony -- Anthony Baxter <anthony(a)interlink.com.au> It's never too late to have a happy childhood.

1 0

RE: [Zope-dev] Why are ZClasses bad?
by Bjorn Stabell 03 Apr '02

03 Apr '02

I would really like to see a hybrid between ZClasses and the CMF's portal_types, so that you can define methods in the Python class that you want portal_type instances of this class to be able to overload. I'm currently abusing the CMF portal_types' actions to "overload" methods of these types. This makes it possible for CMF portal_types to override some of the Python class' methods; that's usually all I need. The methods that you want to be able to overload have to look for a specific CMF action (for that portal_type) and call the skin method that is defined for that action, similar to the way the CMF overloads index_html/view. Regards, -- Bjorn -----Original Message----- From: Joachim Werner [mailto:joe@iuveno-net.de] Posted At: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 17:41 Posted To: Zope Developer Conversation: [Zope-dev] Why are ZClasses bad? Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Why are ZClasses bad? Hi! I guess ZClasses are not "evil" or so. But as somebody who has worked with ZClasses for a long time and then switched to Python Products instead, I see a lot of problems/disadvantages ZClasses have: - Most important: It is rather hard to change the base classes with ZClasses. In Python, you can do that very easily. - Copy&paste programming does not work with ZClasses. With Python Products, I can start writing my own version of an existing Product by just searching and replacing all the occurences of the original Product name by my own one. With ZClasses, copying an existing ZClass and changing it to fit will not work well. - If you use a decent editor (I am currently using PythonWin on Windows), it is much more convenient to have all the methods of your class in just one file than having to drill down into the ZMI and search for individual Scripts (Python) or DTML Methods - Debugging Python code is easier than debugging ZClasses. E.g., you can use a real debugger, or just add temporary print statements to the code. With Python code, the tracebacks are much more helpful than they are with ZClasses, especially if you use DTML ... - Working from Python gives you MUCH more power, and the code usually is more compact. - You can use CVS for the code, and there is a rather strict separation between instances of your Product/class and the code ... - ZClasses behave "strange" with regard to nested acquisition. I experienced cases where two instances of a ZClass acquired from each other in a way they shouldn't ... - ZClasses are relatively slow, especially if you use other ZClasses as base classes of ZClasses. One of the great disadvantages of Python-based Products was that you had to permanently restart your Zope to see the changes in action. But now we have "refresh", which works great. That said, I can still imagine using ZClasses together with a custom-built Python-based base class. They are over-the-web, which is their greatest advantage. For Zope 3, I'd suggest a complete redesign of ZClasses to offer something similar without the disadvantages ... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dario Lopez-Kästen" <dario(a)ita.chalmers.se> To: <zope-dev(a)zope.org> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 11:20 AM Subject: [Zope-dev] Why are ZClasses bad? Hello! I keep hearing people argue that ZClasse are bad, and I am curious as to why they are. I recall something about ZClasses and the catalog, but are there any other "badness" with ZClasses? /dario - curious - -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Lopez-Kästen, dario(a)ita.chalmers.se IT Systems & Services System Developer/System Administrator Chalmers University of Tech. _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev(a)zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ) _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev(a)zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

1 0

re: [Zope-dev] ding, dong, the segfault is dead. Patch attached
by Martijn Jacobs 03 Apr '02

03 Apr '02

Hello leo, > I just put this patch up in production environment and it's been up for > more than 1h30m now, which for me is enough indication that it's in fact > the final solution to the problem. Nice to hear. Is there any change that this patch will be included in the next Zope Binary release? I would love to apply this patch on a python source, compile it, and put it away, but you don't want to do that on a 28K8 PC Anywhere connection, without any compilers installed. So I'm hoping on a very soon Zope release with this version of python. The patch from Matt is OK, but the peformance of heavy database access is dramatic, so I need to upgrade real soon..... The beast is killed! Finally! :) Martijn.

1 0

Why are ZClasses bad?
by Dario Lopez-Kästen 03 Apr '02

03 Apr '02

Hello! I keep hearing people argue that ZClasse are bad, and I am curious as to why they are. I recall something about ZClasses and the catalog, but are there any other "badness" with ZClasses? /dario - curious - -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Lopez-Kästen, dario(a)ita.chalmers.se IT Systems & Services System Developer/System Administrator Chalmers University of Tech.

3 2

SQLite as a Light DB component for Zope and Python
by William Trenker 03 Apr '02

03 Apr '02

I have noticed on the DB lists lately some concern about the future of Gadfly. I have been investigating a marvelous little open-source, no copyright, SQL engine called <http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/index.html>SQLite: An SQL Database Engine In A C Library. I am quite experienced with Python, reasonably experienced with Zope but a greenhorn at extending Python yet I had a crude but working Python extension module for SQLite up and running in 2 days (most of that time figuring out the Python extension conventions). I think Python needs a lightweight SQL engine as a standard module, and I think this would be a good Zope product candidate as well. I'm proposing SQLite as that engine. Here is the developer's feature list, taken from the link given above: Implements a large subset of SQL92. A complete database (with multiple tables and indices) is stored in a single disk file. Atomic commit and rollback protect data integrity. Small memory footprint: less than 20K lines of C code. Four times faster than PostgreSQL. Twice as fast as SQLite 1.0. Very simple C/C++ interface requires the use of only three functions and one opaque structure. TCL bindings included. A TCL-based test suite provides near 100% code coverage. Self-contained: no external dependencies. Built and tested under Linux and Win2K. Sources are uncopyrighted. Use for any purpose. The SQLite source code is 35% comment. These comments are another important source of information. The author, <mailto:drh@hwaci.com>D. Richard <mailto:drh@hwaci.com>Hipp, is a computer science Ph.D. who knows his stuff. This is not green software, it is well designed and tested. It was first released in May 2000 and is very actively updated and supported. Thanks for listening. Bill Trenker Internet Applications Developer Kelowna, BC, Canada "The commandments of the LORD are right, bringing joy to the heart. The commands of the LORD are clear, giving insight to life . . . For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome." (Psalm 19:8, 1John 5:3) <http://torahteacher.com/>torahteacher.com --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com) Version: 6.0.343 / Virus Database: 190 - Release Date: 3/22/02

5 7

Re: [Zope-dev] Final Python 2.1.x and Zope 2.5.x releases?
by Anthony Baxter 02 Apr '02

02 Apr '02

>>> Adam Manock wrote > Does anyone know of a release timeline for a new bugfix release of Python, > be it 2.1.2a or 2.1.3? I'm looking at it at the moment - I plan to roll out a version of this today on some of my ZEO clients and check it's stable. Sometime next week would be my guess for a release. At the moment it's looking like a source release, with RPMs and and ActiveState windows packages. I don't think there'll be a PythonLabs windows binary release, and there wasn't a 2.1.2 Mac binary release, either... Anthony -- Anthony Baxter <anthony(a)interlink.com.au> It's never too late to have a happy childhood.

1 0