- Zope-Dev - Zope lists

Writing output logs from zope.testing.testrunner
by Martin Aspeli 07 Nov '09

07 Nov '09

Hi, I'm trying to turn the results of a test run using zope.testing (zc.recipe.testrunner) into a JUnit compliant XML format so that I can graph it with Hudson (a continuous integration tool). Are there any hooks in zope.testing to write reporting to a file? The output I want is something like this: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> <testsuite errors="1" failures="3" hostname="hazelnut.osuosl.org" name="net.cars.engine.PistonTest" tests="5" time="0.048" timestamp="2007-11-02T23:13:50"> <properties> ... </properties> <testcase classname="net.cars.engine.PistonTest" name="moveUp" time="0.022"> <error message="test timed out after 1 milliseconds" type="java.lang.Exception">java.lang.Exception: test timed out after 1 milliseconds </error> </testcase> <testcase classname="net.cars.engine.PistonTest" name="moveDown" time="0.0010" /> <testcase classname="net.cars.engine.PistonTest" name="checkStatus" time="0.0030"> <failure message="Plunger status invalid to proceed driving." type="junit.framework.AssertionFailedError">junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Plunger status invalid to proceed driving. at net.cars.engine.PistonTest.checkStatus(PistonTest.java:42) </failure> </testcase> <testcase classname="net.cars.engine.PistonTest" name="checkSpeed" time="0.0080"> <failure message="Plunger upward speed below specifications." type="junit.framework.AssertionFailedError">junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Plunger upward speed below specifications. at net.cars.engine.PistonTest.checkSpeed(PistonTest.java:47) </failure> </testcase> <testcase classname="net.cars.engine.PistonTest" name="lubricate" time="0.0030"> <failure message="Failed to lubricate the plunger." type="junit.framework.AssertionFailedError">junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Failed to lubricate the plunger. at net.cars.engine.PistonTest.lubricate(PistonTest.java:52) </failure> </testcase> <system-out><![CDATA[Slowly moving up]]></system-out> <system-err><![CDATA[]]></system-err> </testsuite> Obviously, this is a Java test case, but you get the idea. Incidentally, I think nose supports this kind of thing already, but I don't think I can run zope-like tests using layers etc via nose? Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

2 2

Zope Tests: 6 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 07 Nov '09

07 Nov '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Fri Nov 6 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Sat Nov 7 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: Fri Nov 6 20:39:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012968.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Nov 6 20:41:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012969.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Nov 6 20:43:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012970.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Nov 6 20:45:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012971.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Nov 6 20:47:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012972.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Fri Nov 6 20:49:19 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012973.html

1 0

Zope 2.12 and Five - setting of Products.meta_types
by Martin Aspeli 06 Nov '09

06 Nov '09

Hi, Something has changed in Zope 2.12 that is causing tests that use PlacelessSetup's tearDown() with Five to fail: Error in test /Users/optilude/Development/Plone/Code/Build/plone/4.0/src/plone.autoform/plone/autoform/tests/../autoform.txt Traceback (most recent call last): File "/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/zope.testing-3.7.7-py2.6.egg/zope/testing/doctest.py", line 2416, in debug self.tearDown() File "/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/zope.testing-3.7.7-py2.6.egg/zope/testing/doctest.py", line 2295, in tearDown self._dt_tearDown(test) File "/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/zope.app.testing-3.6.2-py2.6.egg/zope/app/testing/placelesssetup.py", line 59, in tearDown tearDown_() File "/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/zope.testing-3.7.7-py2.6.egg/zope/testing/cleanup.py", line 55, in cleanUp cleanUp() File "/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/zope.testing-3.7.7-py2.6.egg/zope/testing/cleanup.py", line 63, in cleanUp func(*args, **kw) File "/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/Zope2-2.12.1-py2.6-macosx-10.6-i386.egg/Products/Five/fiveconfigure.py", line 228, in cleanUp Products.meta_types = tuple([ info for info in Products.meta_types AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'meta_types' Sure enough, Products.meta_types is not set. In the Zope2 egg, Products/__init__.py contains only the setuptools boilerplate for namespace packages. I'm not sure how or where Products.meta_type is set these days. Does anyone know how to correctly fix this? We could make the tear-down code in Five more robust, obviously, but I fear that's just hiding a deeper problem? Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

4 5

Zope Tests: 6 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 06 Nov '09

06 Nov '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Thu Nov 5 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Fri Nov 6 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: Thu Nov 5 20:38:44 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012962.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 5 20:40:44 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012963.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 5 20:42:45 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012964.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 5 20:44:45 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012965.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 5 20:46:45 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012966.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Thu Nov 5 20:48:45 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012967.html

1 0

Relative path support for z3c.recipe.paster?
by Jonathan Ballet 05 Nov '09

05 Nov '09

Hi, Since zc.recipe.egg 1.2.0, there's an option to generate scripts which contains relative paths to eggs installed in the eggs/ directory [1] This is very handy if you want to move your buildout around, without needing to relaunch the whole buildout process. What do maintainers of z3c.recipe.paster think if I propose a patch which add this option (or something else) to support the same thing for this recipe? Actually, this can be a relatively minor change, since the recipe already use zc.recipe.egg, which means it only has to pass the corresponding option to this one. Thoughts? Cheers, Jonathan [1] : http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zc.recipe.egg#relative-egg-paths

4 5

Zope Tests: 6 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 05 Nov '09

05 Nov '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Nov 4 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Thu Nov 5 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 Nov 4 20:38:52 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012956.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 4 20:40:52 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012957.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 4 20:42:52 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012958.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 4 20:44:53 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012959.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 4 20:46:53 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012960.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Wed Nov 4 20:48:53 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012961.html

1 0

Zope Tests: 6 OK
by Zope Tests Summarizer 04 Nov '09

04 Nov '09

Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Tue Nov 3 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Wed Nov 4 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 Nov 3 20:38:39 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012950.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 3 20:40:39 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012951.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 3 20:42:39 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012952.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 3 20:44:39 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012953.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 3 20:46:39 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012954.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Tue Nov 3 20:48:39 EST 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-November/012955.html

1 0

Where does ISite belong conceptually?
by Thomas Lotze 04 Nov '09

04 Nov '09

While writing tests for the zope.site.hooks module I'm moving to zope.component, I notice that the module calls getSiteManager() on an site object. Such an object isn't technically required to implement an interface that declares that method, but there is one, or rather a pair of them: IPossibleSite and ISite. These interfaces are currently defined by zope.location even though they aren't involved with the concept of location at all. As these two interfaces have the same concept of a site that zope.component has (i.e. simply an object that has a component registry associated with it), I propose moving IPossibleSite and ISite to zope.component, leaving BBB imports behind. Any objections? -- Thomas

5 7

A note on the PyCon Program committee.
by Lennart Regebro 03 Nov '09

03 Nov '09

I was on the PyCon-PC this and last year. Unfortunately, I had less time this year, and the workload was higher, and the time shorter, so they were forced to have many meetings in the middle of the night, my time. So I spend way too little time on it. That pretty much meant that the only other guy doing Zope on the program PC is Brandon, and he is a busy guy too. The result of this was that yesterday it looked like almost no Zope talks would be accepted, because during the last weeding out of talks (there was WAY too many really good talks this year) they all ended up in different groups, and got voted out. This is mainly because those who did the grouping didn't understand that talks about to various Zope-related technologies like Repoze, BFG and the component architecture are at least somewhat related, so they ended up in different groups, and then they don't understand why things like component architectures are important, so the talks get voted out. I was unfortunately on a Plane during the last meeting yesterday, back home from the PloneConf, so I wasn't on that meeting, but what I gather from todays emails and the stats on the talks site, the situation has been ameliorated, so there will be at least some Zope talks, I think. But it was a close call. What to do? Easy: We need more people from the Zope community on the PyCon program committee. Next year, when the talks for 2011 gets decided, there seriously have to be more Zope people in the PC, especially people in US timezone and involved with or closely following all the new things that's happening. The Zope community is pushing a lot of the development in the Python world and is continuing to be the source of much innovation, we shouldn't let that run out in the sand just because the rest of the Python community lags behind us a year. ;-) Obviously, if you join next year, you should still keep a cool head and look at it objectively, we do not want the PC being swamped by people who only will vote for Zope talks. We just need a couple of more people who know what the Zope/BFG/ZTK talks are about and have time to sit through the meetings (who are on IRC). Besides, even though the PC was much bigger this year, the number of submissions was much greater too, so the workload was still too high, so the PC will most likely still need more people in general. ---------- I will also say, that if your Zope-related talk isn't accepted (I think the notifications of who are accepted and who aren't are going to go out soon) do not feel disheartened. There was way more submissions this year. Last year, we only needed to cut a few high quality talks (I seem to remember that it was three). This year, loads of them has been cut. I think there was almost the same amount of talks deemed worthy of PyCon this year as it was submissions in total last year. Last year, about two thirds was accepted, this time less than half, despite what I feel is a generally higher quality of submissions. Getting a talk accepted to PyCon 2010 was doubtlessly hard, and many good talks has been rejected. And I'm not saying that to make people feel good, but because it is true. -- Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64

7 12

CMF/Zope3-ZTK Microsites
by Andreas Jung 03 Nov '09

03 Nov '09

Hi there, I am currently working on the plan for the www.zope.org relaunch. Rough ideas are documented here: http://www.coactivate.org/projects/wwwzopeorg-relaunch/project-home Regarding the Zope3/ZTK and CMF subprojects: what are the plans of those subjects for moving to dedicated microsites. We have basically two options: - microsites based on Sphinx - something based on Plone >From the look & feel point of view there are basically two options: a) use the current zope2.zope.org design b) use the upcoming www.zope.org design (undecided right now) Please let me know in order to incorporate yours ideas and plans with the www.zope.org relaunch master plan. Andreas -- ZOPYX Ltd. & Co KG \ ZOPYX & Friends Charlottenstr. 37/1 \ The experts for your Python, Zope and D-72070 Tübingen \ Plone projects www.zopyx.com, info(a)zopyx.com \ www.zopyx.de/friends, friends(a)zopyx.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------ E-Publishing, Python, Zope & Plone development, Consulting

3 4