[Zope-dev] Mountpoints

[Chris McDonough]

FWIW, I know a couple of people are depending on this, so here's an  
update.

I am working on merging multidatabase support, but I'm having some  
merge/update troubles (if you're interested in the symptoms, see  
http://www.plope.com/Members/chrism/heres_to_cvs).  I suspect I'll  
work it out, but I've got my nose in Subversion documentation at the  
moment.


On Oct 27, 2005, at 1:09 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:

> I lied.  Due to completely preventable circumstances, this merge won't
> be done tonight; instead, it will be done tomorrow evening.
>
> - C
>
>
> On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 16:41 -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
>
>> [Chris McDonough]
>>
>>> Thanks for this!
>>>
>>
>> Not required, so long as I get to thank you for finishing it ;-)
>>
>>
>>> Looks like that test failure is incidental and not symptomatic of
>>> changes made to ZODB.  I think Tres may have said that it can be
>>> fixed by merging in a fix from the Five HEAD, but I don't know this
>>> for fact first-hand.
>>>
>>
>> I'm sure that failure will go away by itself when you're working on
>> the trunk instead of the branch.  What I'd do now:
>>
>> - Check out Zope trunk.
>>
>> - Merge the branch into your trunk sandbox, and forget the branch.
>>
>> - Fix merge conflicts.  I got one, in datatypes.py, and I didn't know
>>   immediately what to do about it so stopped there.  You'll have
>>   better luck ;-).  Note that, under SVN, after you fix a  
>> conflict, you
>>   have to do "svn resolved path/to/conflicted/file"; that's a gimmick
>>   to make sure you don't forget about conflicts.
>>
>> - "svn up" to make sure you've got all the externals the merged
>>   files point at.
>>
>> - "svn up" from time to time thereafter, to suck in other trunk  
>> changes
>>   as they get made.
>>
>> - Check it in when it's stable.
>>
>> - If it takes longer than expected, make a _new_ branch _from_
>>   your merged-into-trunk local trunk sandbox.  (That's easy:  make a
>>   branch directory, "svn switch" to it from your local merged trunk
>>   sandbox, and "svn commit" -- all done).
>>
>>
>>> It's encouraging that most of the tests pass but there are a paucity
>>> of tests that specifically test Zope 2 multidatabase-based mount
>>> points.  There are a few convincing-looking decoys in
>>> Products.ZODBMountPoint.tests but I think I'll need to create a few
>>> more to get the warm and fuzzies before doing the merge.
>>>
>>
>> As above, you can do a _local_ merge right away.  This would save you
>> from other decoys (like the DeprecationWarnings that would no longer
>> exist if you were using the trunk instead of the brach, and the
>> failing-on-branch-but-not-trunk Five test).
>>
>> I recall that, historically, the Zope tests never failed when Zope
>> mounting was in fact broken, so a fat +1 to beefing test coverage
>> there.
>>
>>
>>> I have this on my plate for Wednesday evening.
>>>
>>
>> Understood; there really isn't any good TV on Wednesdays anymore ;-)
>>
>