Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
Paul Winkler wrote: On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:21:08AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: This is a reminder that there will be a feature freeze for the December Zope releases on November 1. OK. I thought there was going to be a 2.9 branch by now, but I don't see one. Is the trunk totally frozen now or what? Yes, no new features. Is it too late to land my long-forgotten configure changes as discussed at http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope/2004-July/151839.html ? Yes The sooner we're ready for the first beta, the sooner we can make the beta and the branch. We need more volunteers to help with fixing bugs. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
Chris McDonough wrote: I suspect there's just some miscommunication about who is actually supposed to make the branch. I have just gone ahead and made it. But yes, now that there is one, the 2.9 branch is frozen for features. I wish you hadn't done that. We shouldn't be making the branch until we get to beta. We can't get to beta until a lot more bugs are fixed. Everyone likes to work on new features, but we need to get bug fixed to actually make releases. I'm worried that we aren't going to make the time-based release schedule. The only leverage I can see is feature freezes. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sunday 13 November 2005 10:48, Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: I suspect there's just some miscommunication about who is actually supposed to make the branch. I have just gone ahead and made it. But yes, now that there is one, the 2.9 branch is frozen for features. I wish you hadn't done that. We shouldn't be making the branch until we get to beta. We can't get to beta until a lot more bugs are fixed. Everyone likes to work on new features, but we need to get bug fixed to actually make releases. I'm worried that we aren't going to make the time-based release schedule. The only leverage I can see is feature freezes. Jim, I am really glad you wrote this comment. I was going to write a similar E-mail, but thought it would be out of line for me, since I am not involved in the Zope 2 development. If someone would have done that with Zope 3, I would have been pretty annoyed. Thus for Zope 3, if someone creates a release branch without discussing it with me first, then that person automatically becomes the release manager for that release. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
Stephan Richter wrote: On Sunday 13 November 2005 10:48, Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: I suspect there's just some miscommunication about who is actually supposed to make the branch. I have just gone ahead and made it. But yes, now that there is one, the 2.9 branch is frozen for features. I wish you hadn't done that. We shouldn't be making the branch until we get to beta. We can't get to beta until a lot more bugs are fixed. Everyone likes to work on new features, but we need to get bug fixed to actually make releases. I'm worried that we aren't going to make the time-based release schedule. The only leverage I can see is feature freezes. Jim, I am really glad you wrote this comment. I was going to write a similar E-mail, but thought it would be out of line for me, since I am not involved in the Zope 2 development. If someone would have done that with Zope 3, I would have been pretty annoyed. Thus for Zope 3, if someone creates a release branch without discussing it with me first, then that person automatically becomes the release manager for that release. Yup. BTW, I'm sure Chris meant well. Chris, I appreciate that you were trying to help. I still wish you hadn't made the branch. :) Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
--On 13. November 2005 11:26:44 -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris, I appreciate that you were trying to help. I still wish you hadn't made the branch. :) svn delete should solve that problem :-) -aj pgpwMOGS2dLXV.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 11:26 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: Stephan Richter wrote: On Sunday 13 November 2005 10:48, Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: I suspect there's just some miscommunication about who is actually supposed to make the branch. I have just gone ahead and made it. But yes, now that there is one, the 2.9 branch is frozen for features. I wish you hadn't done that. We shouldn't be making the branch until we get to beta. We can't get to beta until a lot more bugs are fixed. Everyone likes to work on new features, but we need to get bug fixed to actually make releases. I'm worried that we aren't going to make the time-based release schedule. The only leverage I can see is feature freezes. Jim, I am really glad you wrote this comment. I was going to write a similar E-mail, but thought it would be out of line for me, since I am not involved in the Zope 2 development. If someone would have done that with Zope 3, I would have been pretty annoyed. Thus for Zope 3, if someone creates a release branch without discussing it with me first, then that person automatically becomes the release manager for that release. Yup. BTW, I'm sure Chris meant well. Chris, I appreciate that you were trying to help. I still wish you hadn't made the branch. :) Yes, I predicted I'd be punished. ;-) I don't understand why you would want to wait to make a release branch until a beta. What is the rationale? - C ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: branched Zope 2.9
Andreas Jung wrote: http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/collector_contents?searching=yepSear chableText=status%3Alist%3Aignore_empty=Acceptedstatus%3Alist%3Aignore_ empty=Pendingclassifications%3Alist%3Aignore_empty=bugimportances%3Alis t%3Aignore_empty=critical Ups, I got your point. I thought you were talking about 9 critical error *directly* related to Zope 2.9 e.g. the packaging issue, Five etc..I am aware of this issues. Issue marked by the issuer as critical might appear critical to them..so one needs to decide which issues are blockers. Anyway if we want to go further we need to schedule bug days. One per week, or something like that. Otherwise nobody will set aside the time to discuss, investigate and fix the current bugs. BTW I'm for removing the 2.9 branch for now. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: branched Zope 2.9
--On 13. November 2005 20:33:01 +0100 Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway if we want to go further we need to schedule bug days. One per week, or something like that. Otherwise nobody will set aside the time to discuss, investigate and fix the current bugs. Right, right, but there must be enough people to fix bugs...the last bugs days we had were not sooo successful. There is no way to enforce contributors to fix bugs. Speaking for myself I look at bugs from time to time and see what I can fix. There are bunch of bugs where you don't know if it is a bug or a feature...it's basically a question of having time... -aj pgpNMXsKZ0wq8.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 17:32 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: --On 13. November 2005 11:26:44 -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris, I appreciate that you were trying to help. I still wish you hadn't made the branch. :) svn delete should solve that problem :-) Of course the release manager should have the last say and as the release manager it's totally valid for Andreas to delete the branch. Apologies for taking initiative. I was really just trying to unstick Paul and get things rolling again. But I'd like to understand the rationale for not branching at the time if the feature freeze (Nov 1). Is it just to avoid the work of merging changes from the branch back the HEAD during the period between the freeze and the beta? Doesn't svn make this pretty easy? And what is the maximum amount of time between freeze and beta that we'd consider reasonable? Also, it sounds as if there's an argument being made that *everyone* should pitch in to get 2.9 beta out the door *instead* of committing Zope 2 feature work and the delayed branching is the manifestation of legislation that aims to make this happen. I'm not sure it's healthy to legislate this. There are people who have no burning desire to see a 2.9 go out the door within the next few weeks, but OTOH they are very willing to commit some valuable feature work right now for an eventual 2.10 release and due to the freeze, they haven't done so (and may never do so if not now, given the volunteer-ness of their efforts). How can we accomodate those people in the future? IMO, we should try not to discourage contribution and so we should branch regardless of the state of the trunk within, say, two weeks of freeze. Does that sound reasonable for future releases? - C ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
--On 13. November 2005 14:55:22 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I'd like to understand the rationale for not branching at the time if the feature freeze (Nov 1). Is it just to avoid the work of merging changes from the branch back the HEAD during the period between the freeze and the beta? Doesn't svn make this pretty easy? And what is the maximum amount of time between freeze and beta that we'd consider reasonable? I think all people involved in 2.9 should get their contributions right on the trunk. Then we can branch. Fixing stuff on multiple branches is a pain. You could create a temporary branch for your stuff and merge it back into the HEAD when the 2.9 branch. I think Jim came up with idea to develop new features on a branch. Branches aka new features should be merged into the HEAD if they are considered to be stable. The reason for this approach but be to have the HEAD in a reasonable stable state and to be able to cut a release branch at any time. Andreas pgpRF1znVUWZF.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 21:07 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: Branches aka new features should be merged into the HEAD if they are considered to be stable. The reason for this approach but be to have the HEAD in a reasonable stable state and to be able to cut a release branch at any time. Yup. That's exactly what appears to not be happening at the moment, so I'm confused. The critical issues that are listed in the collector are bugs and not problems created by feature creep. Do those sorts of issues prevent a branch from being made? Or are there other issues that aren't in the collector that are preventing a branch from being made? - C ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: branched Zope 2.9
What about making the banch but calling it an alpha release? I suspect many more people would have a chance to kick the tires if they could download binaries. You may find some of the critical bugs actually only occur in very specific circumstances, or that there are other, even more critical bugs hiding. I think most people are mature enough to understand what an alpha release is, and treat it as such. Just a thought, --Craeg Andreas Jung wrote: --On 13. November 2005 20:33:01 +0100 Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway if we want to go further we need to schedule bug days. One per week, or something like that. Otherwise nobody will set aside the time to discuss, investigate and fix the current bugs. Right, right, but there must be enough people to fix bugs...the last bugs days we had were not sooo successful. There is no way to enforce contributors to fix bugs. Speaking for myself I look at bugs from time to time and see what I can fix. There are bunch of bugs where you don't know if it is a bug or a feature...it's basically a question of having time... -aj ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 12:38 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote: On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 11:26 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: Stephan Richter wrote: On Sunday 13 November 2005 10:48, Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: I suspect there's just some miscommunication about who is actually supposed to make the branch. I have just gone ahead and made it. But yes, now that there is one, the 2.9 branch is frozen for features. I wish you hadn't done that. We shouldn't be making the branch until we get to beta. We can't get to beta until a lot more bugs are fixed. Everyone likes to work on new features, but we need to get bug fixed to actually make releases. I'm worried that we aren't going to make the time-based release schedule. The only leverage I can see is feature freezes. Jim, I am really glad you wrote this comment. I was going to write a similar E-mail, but thought it would be out of line for me, since I am not involved in the Zope 2 development. If someone would have done that with Zope 3, I would have been pretty annoyed. Thus for Zope 3, if someone creates a release branch without discussing it with me first, then that person automatically becomes the release manager for that release. Yup. BTW, I'm sure Chris meant well. Chris, I appreciate that you were trying to help. I still wish you hadn't made the branch. :) Yes, I predicted I'd be punished. ;-) I don't understand why you would want to wait to make a release branch until a beta. What is the rationale? Reread my posts. Jim ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 15:20 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote: On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 21:07 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: Branches aka new features should be merged into the HEAD if they are considered to be stable. The reason for this approach but be to have the HEAD in a reasonable stable state and to be able to cut a release branch at any time. Yup. That's exactly what appears to not be happening at the moment, so I'm confused. The critical issues that are listed in the collector are bugs and not problems created by feature creep. Do those sorts of issues prevent a branch from being made? Or are there other issues that aren't in the collector that are preventing a branch from being made? I don't know if those bugs should prevent a beta or not. But there needs to be some criteria other than feature completeness. Is Zope 2 really in good shape? Or do people just not care? Jim ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 14:55 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote: On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 17:32 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: ... Also, it sounds as if there's an argument being made that *everyone* should pitch in to get 2.9 beta out the door *instead* of committing Zope 2 feature work and the delayed branching is the manifestation of legislation that aims to make this happen. Yup. You figured it out. I'm not sure it's healthy to legislate this. I'm not sure either, but we have to try something. There are people who have no burning desire to see a 2.9 go out the door within the next few weeks, but OTOH they are very willing to commit some valuable feature work right now for an eventual 2.10 release and due to the freeze, they haven't done so (and may never do so if not now, given the volunteer-ness of their efforts). OK, then there will be less for the people who are willing to fix bugs to work on later. How can we accomodate those people in the future? They can always work on a development branch. IMO, we should try not to discourage contribution and so we should branch regardless of the state of the trunk within, say, two weeks of freeze. Does that sound reasonable for future releases? Not to me. Jim ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 16:42 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: I don't know if those bugs should prevent a beta or not. But there needs to be some criteria other than feature completeness. To create the branch or a beta release? I realize there's a desire to tie these acts together but still don't fully understand the rationale for that after rereading your posts as you suggested. I don't want to belabor the point, though, so just call pope at any time and I'll stop, at least for today. ;-) Is Zope 2 really in good shape? Or do people just not care? Maybe both? ;-) I'm currently investigating #1685, so that should be resolved one way or another today. There is one other public bug that doesn't appear to be a showstopper. There are some private bugs too that I haven't looked at. I just noticed Phil's post on the zope3 list where he enumerates what needs to be done for Five/zpkg. None of that is in the collector. There is a Wiki at http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.9/FrontPage . It doesn't have much info in it. I've made it accessible via http://www.zope.org/DevHome/Projects/ now so maybe those who have things to finish up can enumerate what needs to be done there before a beta can be released. - C ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 17:07 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote: On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 16:42 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: I don't know if those bugs should prevent a beta or not. But there needs to be some criteria other than feature completeness. To create the branch or a beta release? I realize there's a desire to tie these acts together but still don't fully understand the rationale for that after rereading your posts as you suggested. I don't want to belabor the point, though, so just call pope at any time and I'll stop, at least for today. ;-) Ignore this. You called pope in another message. - C ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Fulton wrote: Paul Winkler wrote: On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:21:08AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: This is a reminder that there will be a feature freeze for the December Zope releases on November 1. OK. I thought there was going to be a 2.9 branch by now, but I don't see one. Is the trunk totally frozen now or what? Yes, no new features. Is it too late to land my long-forgotten configure changes as discussed at http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope/2004-July/151839.html ? Yes The sooner we're ready for the first beta, the sooner we can make the beta and the branch. We need more volunteers to help with fixing bugs. Which bugs? Sombebody needs to define this, or else risk having the outsiders just walk away. *I* know of no showstoppers: all unit tests are passing, CMF-trunk runs fine on the Zope trunk, etc. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDd9TX+gerLs4ltQ4RAjXcAKDFrEscRwaX2k/o5ggzFnRg8ZzjtgCgmwLO 4rd4lBBcwUKTalOOjJ7k+HA= =xcdb -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
[Tres Seaver] ... Which bugs? Sombebody needs to define this, or else risk having the outsiders just walk away. Insiders too ;-) *I* know of no showstoppers: all unit tests are passing, Not on Windows: Windows test failures on Zope trunk http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1931 CMF-trunk runs fine on the Zope trunk, etc. Certainly agree it would help to have a specific list of what (if anything) still needs to fixed. FWIW, I don't expect Windows test failures to hold up a beta release (note that I didn't say that's a policy I agree with ;-)). ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tim Peters wrote: [Tres Seaver] ... Which bugs? Sombebody needs to define this, or else risk having the outsiders just walk away. Insiders too ;-) *I* know of no showstoppers: all unit tests are passing, Not on Windows: Windows test failures on Zope trunk http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1931 CMF-trunk runs fine on the Zope trunk, etc. Certainly agree it would help to have a specific list of what (if anything) still needs to fixed. FWIW, I don't expect Windows test failures to hold up a beta release (note that I didn't say that's a policy I agree with ;-)). Without Windows-centric developers who are motivated to investigate and fix those bugs, I don't know what else we can do. Note that of all the recent changes, I would jettison zpkg-based builds *first* if our timebox is at risk; I certainly wouldn't agree with leaving the trunk frozen due to issues with a *very* recently-proposed change which provides no measureable benefit to the users (as opposed to maintainers). Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDd9hZ+gerLs4ltQ4RArdzAKDYpo0rFsX6ZOcDbwDBlN0THVm1HgCfVgN4 LY3dLr1YAW8Ycvu7EXiiH5M= =pjmb -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 19:05 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Fulton wrote: Paul Winkler wrote: On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:21:08AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: This is a reminder that there will be a feature freeze for the December Zope releases on November 1. OK. I thought there was going to be a 2.9 branch by now, but I don't see one. Is the trunk totally frozen now or what? Yes, no new features. Is it too late to land my long-forgotten configure changes as discussed at http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope/2004-July/151839.html ? Yes The sooner we're ready for the first beta, the sooner we can make the beta and the branch. We need more volunteers to help with fixing bugs. Which bugs? Sombebody needs to define this, or else risk having the outsiders just walk away. I'm not sure what you mean by outsiders. You're right, someone needs to define this. For Zope 3, the release manager goes through the collector and marks bugs that have to be fixed before the release as critical. I really don't know what the process is for Zope 2, but I did not that there were 9 bugs in the collector marked critical. In any case, the release manager should make the call. Jim ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 19:20 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote: ... Note that of all the recent changes, I would jettison zpkg-based builds *first* if our timebox is at risk; I certainly wouldn't agree with leaving the trunk frozen due to issues with a *very* recently-proposed change which provides no measureable benefit to the users (as opposed to maintainers). Fair enough, but without zpkg there will be a lot more stitching work to do. Way too much of zope.app is stitched in at this point. That's not a problem if we use zpkg to make the distribution. Jim ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: branched Zope 2.9
[Reply-To and Followup-To zope-dev] Andreas Jung wrote: Anyway if we want to go further we need to schedule bug days. One per week, or something like that. Otherwise nobody will set aside the time to discuss, investigate and fix the current bugs. Right, right, but there must be enough people to fix bugs...the last bugs days we had were not sooo successful. Then let's try again :) There is no way to enforce contributors to fix bugs. Speaking for myself I look at bugs from time to time and see what I can fix. There are bunch of bugs where you don't know if it is a bug or a feature...it's basically a question of having time... But having specific days set aside is still a good incentive. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
FWIW, a patched setup.py that appears to compile all known Z2 and Z3 extensions successfully (at least it completes and Zope starts) which doesn't use any zpkg extensions is available at http://www.plope.com/static/misc/setup.py . I took this from the old setup.py before Phil checked in his zpkg fixes, and added an Extension directive for the i18nmessageid C extension. It also requires a change to two files in Zope 3: Index: security/_proxy.c === --- security/_proxy.c (revision 40034) +++ security/_proxy.c (working copy) @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ */ #include Python.h -#include zope.proxy/proxy.h +#include zope/proxy/proxy.h static PyObject *__class__str = 0, *__name__str = 0, *__module__str = 0; and Index: app/container/_zope_proxy_proxy.c === --- app/container/_zope_proxy_proxy.c (revision 40034) +++ app/container/_zope_proxy_proxy.c (working copy) @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ #include modsupport.h #define PROXY_MODULE -#include zope.proxy/proxy.h +#include zope/proxy/proxy.h static PyTypeObject ProxyType; - C On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 19:36 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 19:20 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote: ... Note that of all the recent changes, I would jettison zpkg-based builds *first* if our timebox is at risk; I certainly wouldn't agree with leaving the trunk frozen due to issues with a *very* recently-proposed change which provides no measureable benefit to the users (as opposed to maintainers). Fair enough, but without zpkg there will be a lot more stitching work to do. Way too much of zope.app is stitched in at this point. That's not a problem if we use zpkg to make the distribution. Jim ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
[Tim] Windows test failures on Zope trunk http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1931 [Tres] Without Windows-centric developers who are motivated to investigate and fix those bugs, I don't know what else we can do. [Mark Hammond] That bugs points at http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2005-October/025512.html, which quotes Tim as saying: : No idea where this slash-vs-backslash confusion ultimately comes from, : though. Who recently checked code in hard-coding / as a path : separator? So in this specific example, the problem seems less a lack of Windows centric developers, but more an abundance of non-Windows-centric developers :) These test failures appear at first glance to not be windows specific at all - just possibly pointing at non-portable code written by others. As a Windows developer, I'm afraid I have no idea where I would start looking for this bug. Alas, I was directed not to work on this bug report on the clock, and I haven't had spare time to donate to it (of course there's the usually irony with that: by now I've probably spent 3x as long typing about these bugs as it would have taken to fix them :-( ...). Because I'm sure I noticed the bug within a day or two of its first appearance, the obvious approach is to revert back to earlier revisions of the trunk until finding the checkin that caused it. I thought I wrote up enough clues on zope-dev at the time that whoever checked in the responsible change would think ah, that's related to what I did! at once. Alas again, nobody noticed. So that's a clear path to fixing this one: pinning the blame should be sufficient ;-) In the absence of the guilty party noticing they were to blame, it takes someone on Windows to do the binary search required (because someone on Linux won't see the failure). BTW, notice that the Python tracebacks had exactly the same \ vs / mixup in the same place (between lib and python) as the two originally failing tests. That suggests (but doesn't prove) that a change to sys.path is the ultimate cause. BTW2, I have no idea why the later-failing Five test started failing on Windows, and didn't spend any time investigating that one. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
--On 13. November 2005 19:05:44 -0500 Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which bugs? Sombebody needs to define this, or else risk having the outsiders just walk away. *I* know of no showstoppers: all unit tests are passing, CMF-trunk runs fine on the Zope trunk, etc. About one week ago I tried to build a test release using the HEAD. At that time there were open issues concerning zpgk (as Philikon also wrote in another posting). E.g. making the source tarball did not work properly. So being unable to build a source tarball is definitely a blocker for me. Andreas pgpTkc6LTylC5.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: branched Zope 2.9
--On 14. November 2005 02:42:31 +0100 Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Reply-To and Followup-To zope-dev] Andreas Jung wrote: Anyway if we want to go further we need to schedule bug days. One per week, or something like that. Otherwise nobody will set aside the time to discuss, investigate and fix the current bugs. Right, right, but there must be enough people to fix bugs...the last bugs days we had were not sooo successful. Then let's try again :) You're going to organize them? :-) -aj pgpDVIkPwg4IP.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mark Hammond wrote: Not on Windows: Windows test failures on Zope trunk http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1931 CMF-trunk runs fine on the Zope trunk, etc. Certainly agree it would help to have a specific list of what (if anything) still needs to fixed. FWIW, I don't expect Windows test failures to hold up a beta release (note that I didn't say that's a policy I agree with ;-)). Without Windows-centric developers who are motivated to investigate and fix those bugs, I don't know what else we can do. That bugs points at http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2005-October/025512.html, which quotes Tim as saying: : No idea where this slash-vs-backslash confusion ultimately comes from, : though. Who recently checked code in hard-coding / as a path : separator? So in this specific example, the problem seems less a lack of Windows centric developers, but more an abundance of non-Windows-centric developers :) These test failures appear at first glance to not be windows specific at all - just possibly pointing at non-portable code written by others. As a Windows developer, I'm afraid I have no idea where I would start looking for this bug. test.py in the root is the likely culprit, as it is mucking with sys.path. Does this patch make the Windows tests pass? - --- test.py (revision 40087) +++ test.py (working copy) @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ if shome: shome = os.path.abspath(shome) else: - -shome = os.path.join(zhome, 'lib/python') +shome = os.path.join(zhome, 'lib', 'python') elif shome: shome = os.path.abspath(shome) zhome = os.path.dirname(os.path.dirname(shome)) Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDeBX3+gerLs4ltQ4RAiMdAKC7L8kACTUcTON76ch5bLNEkzO60gCgmAWw tEeI08XK7m7PP3wD3Kwt9xE= =0aEf -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: Reminder: feature freeze November 1.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tres Seaver wrote: Mark Hammond wrote: Not on Windows: Windows test failures on Zope trunk http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1931 CMF-trunk runs fine on the Zope trunk, etc. Certainly agree it would help to have a specific list of what (if anything) still needs to fixed. FWIW, I don't expect Windows test failures to hold up a beta release (note that I didn't say that's a policy I agree with ;-)). Without Windows-centric developers who are motivated to investigate and fix those bugs, I don't know what else we can do. That bugs points at http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2005-October/025512.html, which quotes Tim as saying: : No idea where this slash-vs-backslash confusion ultimately comes from, : though. Who recently checked code in hard-coding / as a path : separator? So in this specific example, the problem seems less a lack of Windows centric developers, but more an abundance of non-Windows-centric developers :) These test failures appear at first glance to not be windows specific at all - just possibly pointing at non-portable code written by others. As a Windows developer, I'm afraid I have no idea where I would start looking for this bug. test.py in the root is the likely culprit, as it is mucking with sys.path. Does this patch make the Windows tests pass? --- test.py (revision 40087) +++ test.py (working copy) @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ if shome: shome = os.path.abspath(shome) else: -shome = os.path.join(zhome, 'lib/python') +shome = os.path.join(zhome, 'lib', 'python') elif shome: shome = os.path.abspath(shome) zhome = os.path.dirname(os.path.dirname(shome)) Whoops, needs another one, too: - --- test.py (revision 40091) +++ test.py (working copy) @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ else: # No zope home, assume that it is the script directory zhome = os.path.abspath(os.path.dirname(sys.argv[0])) - -shome = os.path.join(zhome, 'lib/python') +shome = os.path.join(zhome, 'lib', 'python') sys.path.insert(0, shome) Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDeBkn+gerLs4ltQ4RAuyiAKCI5i2L4PvNnuw6lRq873VpBgw1YACdHPlO V6YGX2AQcAvoHcyHSnTbWgI= =BfFn -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
