Hi, Adam Groszer schrieb:
Log message for revision 83382: fix of 599 error on conflict error in request see: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2008-January/030844.html
Changed: U zope.server/trunk/setup.py U zope.server/trunk/src/zope/server/ftp/publisher.py
-=- Modified: zope.server/trunk/setup.py =================================================================== --- zope.server/trunk/setup.py 2008-02-01 15:08:00 UTC (rev 83381) +++ zope.server/trunk/setup.py 2008-02-01 15:19:32 UTC (rev 83382) @@ -30,10 +30,10 @@ long_description=open('README.txt').read(),
packages=find_packages('src'), - package_dir = {'': 'src'}, + package_dir = {'': 'src'},
namespace_packages=['zope',], - + tests_require = ['zope.testing', 'zope.i18n', 'zope.component'], @@ -41,7 +41,8 @@ 'zope.interface', 'zope.publisher', 'zope.security', - 'zope.deprecation'], + 'zope.deprecation', + 'ZODB3'], include_package_data = True, zip_safe = False, entry_points = """
Please try to avoid mixing mixing checkins with different purposes. This whitespace change should be a separate checkin.
Modified: zope.server/trunk/src/zope/server/ftp/publisher.py =================================================================== --- zope.server/trunk/src/zope/server/ftp/publisher.py 2008-02-01 15:08:00 UTC (rev 83381) +++ zope.server/trunk/src/zope/server/ftp/publisher.py 2008-02-01 15:19:32 UTC (rev 83382) @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ return self._execute(path, 'ls', split=False, filter=filter)
def readfile(self, path, outstream, start=0, end=None): - return self._execute(path, 'readfile', + return self._execute(path, 'readfile', outstream=outstream, start=start, end=end)
def lsinfo(self, path): @@ -108,9 +108,12 @@
# Note that publish() calls close() on request, which deletes the # response from the request, so that we need to keep track of it. - response = request.response - publish(request) - return response.getResult() + # agroszer: 2008.feb.1.: currently the above seems not to be true + # request will KEEP the response on close() + # even more if a retry occurs in the publisher, + # the response will be LOST, so we must accept the returned request + request = publish(request) + return request.response.getResult()
Same comment as previously, please avoid this style of annotation. Also, it doesn't look like the issue is actually finally resolved as you say `seems`. SVN tracks who edited what and when, the statement of your name and the change date isn't necessary. Again, a test case is missing. Please review your other related checkins as well. Christian -- gocept gmbh & co. kg - forsterstrasse 29 - 06112 halle (saale) - germany www.gocept.com - ct@gocept.com - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 - fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development