- Zope-Dev - Zope lists

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
by Jim Fulton 22 Apr '04

22 Apr '04

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > Why would they switch to Zope 2.8 if not for the component architecture? To stay current? To get MVCC? To get new-style extension classes, and thus access to many modern Python features. Later releases will provide benefits beyond just the Z3 features. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:jim@zope.com Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org

2 2

Zope Bug Day Next Thursday (April 29)
by Casey Duncan 22 Apr '04

22 Apr '04

I proposed this yesterday, but I wanted to make sure that everyone say it. I think we should have a bug day, we're long overdue. I'm proposing we hold it on Thursday, April 29. We'll convene on the #zope-dev irc channel. -Casey

1 0

On a constructive note: Zope 2.8
by Martijn Faassen 22 Apr '04

22 Apr '04

Hey there, I understand from: http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.8/MilestonePlan Zope 2.8 is now planned for june. If Zope 2.8 is indeed released by june this could fit fairly well with my own (also delayed :) plans for using this facility in Silva. The obvious area I could try to contribute is in integrating Zope 3 interfaces in Zope 2. Have interfaces stabilized enough to start this work, or should I wait until next month (may is indicated on the planning). What steps need to be taken concretely before such integration is considered completed? I know the package rename discussion rename (zope to z) in Zope 3 is related to this. Regards, Martijn

2 4

Re: [Zope-dev] [Q] Pickle support for C wrapper and ZEO
by Ames Andreas (MPA/DF) 22 Apr '04

22 Apr '04

Hello Martin, kretschmar(a)infoman.de (Martin Kretschmar) writes: putting this back on list, hope it's ok with you. > Hello, > > I was once debugging an application which usually > crashed after 2-3 days during load tests. It was > doing a lot of database operations. The access > was to a Microsoft SQL Server. > > There has been once a warning, that constantly > creating and deleting CDatabase-Objects leeds to > memory leaks. So the application had been written > to reuse a given CDatabase object. > > The occasional crashes, shown to be somewhere in > the ODBC code, were gone, when each Thread got back > exactly his last CDatabase object in use. > > In this sense my definition of threadsafe is not > always the way Microsoft sees it. > > Regards, > Martin Thanks for the hint, but I won't use MFC in my code (portability). I'm currently using unixODBC to get started and hope to be able to preserve source code compatibility with MS's ODBC Driver Manager (and eventually iODBC if needed). If there are bugs in the platform code then these will bother me not before some time from now because I'm still wrapping all (or rather a subset of) those SQL... functions which live in sql[ext].h. Currently my own refcount leaks are much worse than any driver manager's memory leaks could ever be ;-). cheers, andreas

1 0

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
by Troy Farrell 22 Apr '04

22 Apr '04

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: |> Troy Farrell wrote: |> |> -1 on alternative 4. This lurker is with Tres. This is a Z3 |> challenge. I wonder how many part-time Zope 2 admins will be happy |> about making this change and having to retest code they've inherited |> from some contract developer. | | Why would they switch to Zope 2.8 if not for the component architecture? | So, if you just "inherited" some code for maintainance, this will | unlikely break your program. In fact, it won't even break your program | when the rename is effective, since we'll keep a facade Zope package | around. Philipp, not everyone follows well-planned, ideal upgrade practices. Often, upgrades come when they can be had, and even more frequently when there is a security hole and the fix is only available for the latest version or two. I'm remembering this: http://securityfocus.com/bid/9400/ This was the occasion for my upgrade to 2.7, which proved to be a learning experience. Fortunately, I used a test instance for my upgrade :) Deprecation errors are nice, but usually admins take one of two approaches to them, neither of which is ideal: 1) Ignore them since everything seems to work alright 2) See the apocalypse horsemen headed their direction - this results in "URGENT!!! HELP ME PLAESE RIGHT NOW" email on the zope(a)zope.org list. This will cause many a shock when the occasion for upgrade to 2.9 comes around. ~ At 2 A.M. As for moving to CA, I'm trying it right now. I'm working through buddydemo and trying to wrap my head around the verbosity that is Zope 3. My plan is that starting mid-May, all new projects will be on Zope 3 sans the backward compatibility stuffs. My personal preference is for option 1 or option 3. Troy -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFAhnF8AykmMtO9ylMRAh31AJ9EmIAtssh9k/CiNFGGMMQRxK0WSACeIRms 1iq79Ikc982nJvp/X15oETE= =5Kuy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 3

List of bugs which can be closed
by Maik Jablonski 22 Apr '04

22 Apr '04

2 1

Zope 2.6 branch "closed for bugfixes"?
by Chris Withers 21 Apr '04

21 Apr '04

Tres Seaver wrote: > Chris, > > I would call the 2.6 branch "closed except for serious security bugs"; > please don't check in new features or minor bugfixes there. How come? and was this announced anywhere? I don't see what harm applying minor bugfixes to any release branch could do... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

4 3

Re: Proposal: Rename zope package
by Tres Seaver 21 Apr '04

21 Apr '04

Jim Fulton wrote: > Tres Seaver wrote: > >> Jim Fulton wrote: >> >>> Jim Fulton wrote: >>> >>>> Based on recent discussions, I've created a proposal: >>>> >>>> http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/RenameTheZopePackage >>>> >>>> to rename the "zope" package to "z". Unless there are strong >>>> objections, we'll do this after we move the Zope repository head to >>>> subversion at the end of the month. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I've gotten enough negative feedback to "z", that I've added an >>> alternative 4 >>> to the proposal: >>> >>> 4. Rename the Zope package to Zope2 and provide a legacy Zope >>> package >> >> >> >> -1, for reasons I've stated before. > > > > Before you said: > > the amount of third-party code which we would break is incalculable. > > >> we *can't* inflict the pain on the large set of installed production >> servers to favor "cleanliness" for the one only installed by >> arrow-backed pioneers. We would be *much* better off with the status >> quo ante than with such a "solution". > > > I tried to address your concerns. The proposal should *not* inflict > pain on installed production servers. Is your complaint that: > > - There will be deprecation warnings or that > > - We would not enable this by default in 2.9, Sorry for the misunderstanding, which was mine: given the current deprecation scheme, I am only -0 on the notion. Tres. -- =============================================================== Tres Seaver tseaver(a)zope.com Zope Corporation "Zope Dealers" http://www.zope.com

1 0

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?!
by kretschmar＠infoman.de 21 Apr '04

21 Apr '04

Hello, > Jim, > > we native german speakers tend to be much more direct > and phrase dings more bluntly the you americans do. > In german I read Maik's statement as a strong opinion > but never as an insult. > > Since I am the one who asked Mike to speak up I would > feel bad if it created any bad feelings. > > Robert Robert is 100% right! Mikes oppion contains no real insults at all, not even really bad phrases, at least not in the original german version. German insults look quite different, and we tend to recognize them when we read them. In this sense I was somewhat careless in my instant translation and I want to apologize for it. Martin

1 0

RE: [Zope-dev] zope 2.7.0: no tracebacks produced
by Mika, David P (Research) 21 Apr '04

21 Apr '04

Thanks! I have found the error_log object in the ZMI too. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Willi Langenberger [mailto:wlang@wu-wien.ac.at] Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 6:41 PM To: Mika, David P (Research) Cc: 'zope-dev(a)zope.org' Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] zope 2.7.0: no tracebacks produced According to Mika, David P (Research): > I am making a big upgrade and moving my products from 2.3.1 on HP-UX > to 2.7.0 on windows 2000 and can't get zope to produce any tracebacks > when it encounters errors. I've checked all the log files and monitor > stdout > to no avail. All I get is a brief html message with error type and value > and > instructions to check the error log. from Zope-2.7.0/lib/python/ZPublisher/HTTPResponse.py: # Enable APPEND_TRACEBACKS to make Zope append tracebacks like it used to, # but a better solution is to make standard_error_message display error_tb. APPEND_TRACEBACKS = 0 \wlang{} -- Willi.Langenberger(a)wu-wien.ac.at Fax: +43/1/31336/9207 Zentrum fuer Informatikdienste, Wirtschaftsuniversitaet Wien, Austria

1 0