Re: [Zope-CMF] Move to github?
Hi! Martin Aspeli wrote: I mean, there's no tangible cost (financial or otherwise) of using GitHub; and git's architecture pretty much ensures that there's no lock-in (especially if mirroring is set up). [...] I don't see it as supporting GitHub. I see it as using a service that is free to us and rather good. It saves resources (e.g. the time spent managing svn.zope.org http://svn.zope.org; the cost of bandwidth) that can be better spent elsewhere (e.g. working on Zope/CMF). It helps make it easier for others to contribute, because so many people already know how to use GitHub. GitHub Inc. is too successful. It already has too much power. That's not good for the open source community. Because? GitHub is on the best way to become a monopoly in the area of social coding platforms. Just like Facebook and Twitter already are in their markets. And all these platforms benefit from the network effect: Each additional user makes the monopoly more stable and powerful. As you say above, the fact other people use them as well makes them so valuable. Monopolies are bad. (At least if they are in private hand.) There is no technical lock-in for the Git repositories. But there are economic lock-in mechanisms. If you use a platform, you invest in it: You have to wrap your head around it. Maybe you helped improving the platform by reporting bugs, making feature requests or writing tools for it. You spend time trying to convince other people to use that platform. All these investments get lost if you switch to an other platform. And even if an other platform would be technically better you wouldn't switch because of the network effect that let's you stay where all the other people are. So GitHub Inc. has to make really bad decisions before people have an incentive to go somewhere else. What's the worst that could happen? GitHub goes belly-up and we starting using a different remote in our repos? GitHub tries to violate the license terms of our software somehow (that seems very unlikely)? Companies like GitHub Inc. want to maximize their profit. As soon as they are big enough, they become arrogant. One day they will start making money by placing ads everywhere. If I did get the discussion correctly, people didn't lobby for moving to GitHub just to use it as a cheap hosting service. They did it because of the proprietary features GitHub is building around the repositories. I don't want to give the responsibility for the way I collaborate with other contributers into the hands of a company. Cheers, Yuppie ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] Move to github?
Am 02.03.2013, 22:44 Uhr, schrieb Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com: The vote by foundation members to move to Github (rather than self-hosted Git) was far from unanimous. In fact, we are supposed to have worked out a means where folks could push to git.zope.org as the canonical repository for some projects. I would prefer this if possible. Charlie -- Charlie Clark Managing Director Clark Consulting Research German Office Kronenstr. 27a Düsseldorf D- 40217 Tel: +49-211-600-3657 Mobile: +49-178-782-6226 ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] cmf-tests -
Op 04-03-13 03:54, Patrick Gerken schreef: Hi , are the missing CMF Tests only temporary or is there a need for a new source of test reports? I wonder if this is simply because bin/buildout failed to finish, though I would still expect some output from the test bot then. I have added a missing pin for z3c.recipe.scripts (1.0.1), which should help there. If that commit helps, then some test errors will show up in Products.CMFDefault, mostly this: TypeError: Object has default comparison I don't know what that is about. -- Maurits van Rees: http://maurits.vanrees.org/ Zest Software: http://zestsoftware.nl ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] Move to github?
I'm not major a CMF contributor and are unlikely to actually contribute much in the future, so I do not and should not have a say in the move. I'd just want to correct a factually incorrect statement though: On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM, yuppie y.2...@wcm-solutions.de wrote: Monopolies are bad. (At least if they are in private hand.) On the contrary, it's state supported monopolies that are bad. github, just like twitter and facebook, are still subject to market forces (and hence neither of them are actually monopolies in a strict sense, and just a dominant actor on the market, but that's nitpicking). As they are subject to market forces they can and will be deposed from being the major platform, if they stop doing a good job. Therefore, this type of monopoly are much less bad than any state-supported monopoly. This concludes this political broadcast. //Lennart ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] Move to github?
Am 04.03.2013, 17:46 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com: On the contrary, it's state supported monopolies that are bad… Monopolies of any sort are usually bad and, unfortunately, rarely corrected by market forces. So much for efficient market theory. Which is why, since Standard Oil, we have anti-trust legislation. There are exceptions but these are usually of a philosophical such as the European tradition of having a monopoly on the use of force, the US position (2nd amendment? is noticeably nuanced). Philosophically speaking I would side with Yuppie in saying the GitHub is up to no good and I do not maintain any repositories on it myself (that, and the fact that I can't get my head round git). However, with reference to our common projects I think it is a general discussion and I would feel slightly hypocritical pushing for a clean solution here while contributing to other parts of Zope (chance would be a fine thing) that are on GitHub. Still hoping for a third option. Charlie -- Charlie Clark Managing Director Clark Consulting Research German Office Kronenstr. 27a Düsseldorf D- 40217 Tel: +49-211-600-3657 Mobile: +49-178-782-6226 ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] cmf-tests -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/04/2013 06:46 AM, Maurits van Rees wrote: If that commit helps, then some test errors will show up in Products.CMFDefault, mostly this: TypeError: Object has default comparison New BTrees expects objects used as keys to have real comparison semantics: Python's default (based on id()) is not suitable for persistent objects. Ters. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlE1ANoACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ53GACg0DzGSdg//7eONFIO8vN/vo9a 5ykAni03jupDUK4BSLf/xsWELxcH00+S =cAwL -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] cmf-tests -
Tres Seaver tseaver@... writes: On 03/04/2013 06:46 AM, Maurits van Rees wrote: If that commit helps, then some test errors will show up in Products.CMFDefault, mostly this: TypeError: Object has default comparison New BTrees expects objects used as keys to have real comparison semantics: Python's default (based on id()) is not suitable for persistent objects. The most common source of this warning is trying to store `None`: from BTrees.OOBTree import OOBTree tree = OOBTree() tree[1] = 1 tree[None] = 2 Traceback (most recent call last): File console, line 1, in module TypeError: Object has default comparison Unfortunately the ZCatalog has advertised support for storing None for some time, so there's likely some code out there which uses this. Hanno ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] cmf-tests -
Maurits van Rees m.van.rees@... writes: I have added a missing pin for z3c.recipe.scripts (1.0.1), which should help there. I'm surprised you found that pin missing. I thought I had removed all use of that recipe from the CMF trunk builout, as it isn't compatible with buildout 2 yet. But maybe it's too ambitious to aim for buildout 2 / Zope 4 compatibility for CMF trunk. I only tried to fix the sources and buildout so it would at least run, after Zope was moved to github. But of course there's code and test changes to be made to reach compatibility with all the new zope.* 4.x versions. I'm not really up to work on all of those. So if nobody else is interested in that work, maybe it would be safer to aim for Zope 2.13 compatibility only at this point. Hanno ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] cmf-tests -
Patrick Gerken patrick.gerken@... writes: are the missing CMF Tests only temporary or is there a need for a new source of test reports? I spoke to Stefan Holek and he no longer has the time nor interest to maintain the Zope2 and CMF nightly tests. He's not working on any web based projects anymore, so this is quite understandable. As CMF isn't moving to github, it seems the free travis-ci integration won't help here either. So if someone is interested in running the tests, that would probably be appreciated. Hanno ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] Move to github?
yuppie y.2013@... writes: Hanno Schlichting wrote: Does anyone have objections if I ask him to convert the CMF packages? Yes. I have objections. I'd like to keep contributing to CMF. But I'm not going to support GitHub Inc. by using its services. Ok. I thought this might be controversial for CMF. I'm not going to push or argue about this for CMF, as I think Yvo is the closest to a benevolent dictator we have for CMF these days and the project certainly cannot afford to loose him. Hanno ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
[Zope-CMF] cmf-tests -
This is the summary for test reports received on the cmf-tests list between 2013-03-03 00:00:00 UTC and 2013-03-04 00:00:00 UTC: See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds. An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our buildbot documentation: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html#the-nightly-builds Reports received Non-OK results -- ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
