Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Unit Test Failures
On the actual problem, this is a big red flag for me: 'isinstance(zapi.getSiteManager(), FiveSiteManager)': True, Fails. So, it's not a FivesiteManager. What is it? None, or something else? Since this seems to be a cleanup issue, my guess is: Something else. Probably another one of the site tests doesn't clean up (and that's probably my fault). ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On 12/20/05, Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, for next release we plan to replace several parts with the corresponding components from Zope 3 (e.g. ZPT´). Philipp is working on a proposal on that issue. In addition I would like to get rid of some old stuff that is no longer maintained and buggy: - ZopeTutorial (could be ripped off without implications and made available for download on zope.org) - HelpSys - from a programmers view pretty much useless and not very helpful. I consider to replace it with something more useful (not sure we can re-use apidoc from Zope 3 in some way, perhaps the inclusion of Dieter's Docfinder might be more useful for programmers) - Gadfly(DA) - do we really need this? We discussed this already. In my opinion the purpose of Gadfly is only educational but nothing that one really needs or uses for production. It could be removed and made available for download on zope.org. And my favourite enemy in Zope: ZClasses :-) I would like to mark them _clearly_ as an obsolete feature (DeprecationWarning, Warnings in the ZMI and the Zope Book). I _don't_ propose to remove them at some point but ppl should be aware that they are using one of the most-scary components in Zope (please no further discussion about the pros and cons of ZClasses..this discussion took already place already a bunch of times on the list). +0 on Gadfly, I have no opinion there. +1 on all else. -- Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/ CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
On 18. Dez 2005, at 17:58, Tim Peters wrote: Nobody should be installing from a checkout to begin with, right? Ok, so that's probably where we disagree then ;-) I almost exclusively work with checkouts, and I would think many developers (as opposed to users) do. Is there really no way to allow make install to work from a sandbox? Stefan -- Anything that happens, happens. --Douglas Adams ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
+1 on all of them On Tue, December 20, 2005 07:52, Andreas Jung wrote: Hi, for next release we plan to replace several parts with the corresponding components from Zope 3 (e.g. ZPT´). Philipp is working on a proposal on that issue. In addition I would like to get rid of some old stuff that is no longer maintained and buggy: - ZopeTutorial (could be ripped off without implications and made available for download on zope.org) - HelpSys - from a programmers view pretty much useless and not very helpful. I consider to replace it with something more useful (not sure we can re-use apidoc from Zope 3 in some way, perhaps the inclusion of Dieter's Docfinder might be more useful for programmers) - Gadfly(DA) - do we really need this? We discussed this already. In my opinion the purpose of Gadfly is only educational but nothing that one really needs or uses for production. It could be removed and made available for download on zope.org. And my favourite enemy in Zope: ZClasses :-) I would like to mark them _clearly_ as an obsolete feature (DeprecationWarning, Warnings in the ZMI and the Zope Book). I _don't_ propose to remove them at some point but ppl should be aware that they are using one of the most-scary components in Zope (please no further discussion about the pros and cons of ZClasses..this discussion took already place already a bunch of times on the list). -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 ) ___ XLhost.de - eXperts in Linux hosting Jürgen Herrmann Bruderwöhrdstraße 15b, DE-93051 Regensburg Fon: +49 (0)700 XLHOSTDE [0700 95467833] Fax: +49 (0)721 151 463027 WEB: http://www.XLhost.de ___ 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] Zope 2.10: Wiki started
I created a wiki for the 2.10 development: http://www.zope.org/DevHome/Projects/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.10/FrontPage Feel free to contribute and comment. Andreas pgpse6HSAzkQI.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] buildbot failure in Zope branches 2.9 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope branches 2.9 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 2341 Blamelist: shh BUILD FAILED: failed test sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ 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] buildbot failure in Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 2342 Blamelist: shh BUILD FAILED: failed test sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ 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: Unit Test Failures
Lennart Regebro wrote: On the actual problem, this is a big red flag for me: 'isinstance(zapi.getSiteManager(), FiveSiteManager)': True, Fails. So, it's not a FivesiteManager. What is it? None, or something else? It's the global site manager if not the FiveSiteManager. Since this seems to be a cleanup issue, my guess is: Something else. Probably another one of the site tests doesn't clean up (and that's probably my fault). Nope, it's really nobody's fault but mine. And the site tests weren't responsible for sure. So, before I explain this issue in detail, let me say: I've already fixed this in the Five repo after remembering a peculiarity in Zope 3.1+ last night. I just haven't had the time yet to merge it to the Zope repo, will do that first thing I'm back in SVN check-in range (on the road right now). So, here's the deal: zope.component doesn't have a clue about local sites. All it knows is the global site manager. However, it *does* provide a hook so that other software can influence where the site manager is found. zope.app.component (notice the app here) provides such a hook that knows about the site in the thread local. That's how zope.component in the end *does* find local sites, because it calls the hook. Now, in Zope X3 3.0, the hooks were set via ZCML using the hook / directive. This directive was ripped out in Zope 3.1 and replaced by a simple function, zope.app.component.hooks.setHooks(). This function is called upon Zope startup by zope.app.appsetup.appsetup.config() so that the hooks are set when Zope is running. A clean-up function is registered with the general test clean-up facility in Zope 3 that clears the hook. So, a unit test would normally not see the hooks *if* it is run *after* a test that has used e.g. placelesssetup.tearDown(). So, in the end, it was actually a problem of cleaning up too much, not too little. I've already had to deal with this problem in the utility tests and solved it there, but didn't remember it when I initially wrote the functional test. That's why my debugging efforts were futile back then. I guess this needs to be handled a better way, but I leave it to Stephan (who I think is responsible for the hooks handling) to decide what to do. Philipp This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ 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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
On 20 Dec 2005, at 08:51, Stefan H. Holek wrote: On 18. Dez 2005, at 17:58, Tim Peters wrote: Nobody should be installing from a checkout to begin with, right? Ok, so that's probably where we disagree then ;-) I almost exclusively work with checkouts, and I would think many developers (as opposed to users) do. Is there really no way to allow make install to work from a sandbox? I strongly disagree as well. I believe it is normal practice to grab a tag or branch tip from subversion and install that. Why would I ever grab some tarball when I'm at the command line already and use svn for everything else, anyway? jens ___ 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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
--On 20. Dezember 2005 09:59:36 + Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I strongly disagree as well. I believe it is normal practice to grab a tag or branch tip from subversion and install that. Why would I ever grab some tarball when I'm at the command line already and use svn for everything else, anyway? What is wrong with: ./configure make inplace ? -aj pgp9HfzHs3rAM.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] Re: svn.zope.org borked
On 19 Dec 2005, at 22:08, Jim Fulton wrote: Sounds good. I'll announce that the repo will be down for maintenance on the 25th, Just FYI, during a dry run this morning I hit an obvious snag: The subversion packages on svn.zope.org are so ancient that they cannot create FSFS backends. What I was able to test so far is dumping: It takes just 10 minutes and creates a file 1.1GB in size, so that's good. I had a look at the packages on the box and luckily the (rather obscure) source they are from does supply newer ones: http://summersoft.fay.ar.us/pub/subversion/latest/redhat-9.0/bin/ From eyeballing the RPM requirements and then doing a dry-run the packages that will need updating are... - swig (1.3.19-1.1 to 1.3.19-3) - subversion (1.0.6-1 to 1.2.3-1) - subversion-tools (1.0.6-1 to 1.2.3-1) - subversion-python (1.0.6-1 to 1.2.3-1) This additional packages needs to be installed for svn-tools: - subversion-perl (1.2.3-1) Since I cannot do any test right now for loading the dumpfile into a FSFS-based repository I suggest doing this package upgrade beforehand. It only takes a few minutes. I cannot make any guarantees that nothing will break, however. The only major upgrade to a running SVN setup that I have done was 1.1 to 1.2.1 and that was perfectly fine. How should I proceed? jens ___ 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: sessions in the presence of conflicts
On Dec 20, 2005, at 12:36 AM, Dennis Allison wrote: The interaction between sessions, conflicts, and persistence is a bit confusing. I am still trying to understand the code in depth. One thing is for sure, request.SESSION and/or request['SESSION'] must be persistent for things to work. Mutable objects in the session variable set (dictionaries and lists) have to be handled specially to get the persistence machinery to recognize they have been changed. In this case, I am trying to ensure that the session variables get identified as persistent. My question is whether using update (an implicit assignment) triggers the persistence mechanism. It is the moral equivalent of writing request['SESSION']['alpha'] = 'a'B request['SESSION']['beta'] = 'b' but I am unsure whether the persistence mechanism will recognize it as such. The implementation of TransientObjects's update method is: def update(self, d): self._p_changed = 1 for k in d.keys(): self[k] = d[k] So yes... - 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] svn.zope.org borked
Jens Vagelpohl wrote: I appreciate the suggestion but this change is limited to the data backend switchover. Setting up anonymous access via HTTP is a separate activity for another day. You are right, though, access (at least anonymous access) via HTTP is preferable for a lot of reasons. Ah, you know you want to do anonymous http, writeable https and a nice WebSVN front end ;-) *grinz* Chris ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
+1 on all. On Dec 20, 2005, at 1:52 AM, Andreas Jung wrote: Hi, for next release we plan to replace several parts with the corresponding components from Zope 3 (e.g. ZPT´). Philipp is working on a proposal on that issue. In addition I would like to get rid of some old stuff that is no longer maintained and buggy: - ZopeTutorial (could be ripped off without implications and made available for download on zope.org) - HelpSys - from a programmers view pretty much useless and not very helpful. I consider to replace it with something more useful (not sure we can re-use apidoc from Zope 3 in some way, perhaps the inclusion of Dieter's Docfinder might be more useful for programmers) - Gadfly(DA) - do we really need this? We discussed this already. In my opinion the purpose of Gadfly is only educational but nothing that one really needs or uses for production. It could be removed and made available for download on zope.org. And my favourite enemy in Zope: ZClasses :-) I would like to mark them _clearly_ as an obsolete feature (DeprecationWarning, Warnings in the ZMI and the Zope Book). I _don't_ propose to remove them at some point but ppl should be aware that they are using one of the most-scary components in Zope (please no further discussion about the pros and cons of ZClasses..this discussion took already place already a bunch of times on the list). -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 ) ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 09:43:18AM +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote: | +0 on Gadfly, I have no opinion there. | +1 on all else. I have proposed using sqlite/ZSQLiteDA in the past which is more like a real database, but still embeded, but people didn't like much the idea. -- Sidnei da Silva Enfold Systems, LLC. http://enfoldsystems.com ___ 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: svn.zope.org borked
Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On 19 Dec 2005, at 22:08, Jim Fulton wrote: Sounds good. I'll announce that the repo will be down for maintenance on the 25th, Just FYI, during a dry run this morning I hit an obvious snag: The subversion packages on svn.zope.org are so ancient that they cannot create FSFS backends. What I was able to test so far is dumping: It takes just 10 minutes and creates a file 1.1GB in size, so that's good. I had a look at the packages on the box and luckily the (rather obscure) source they are from does supply newer ones: http://summersoft.fay.ar.us/pub/subversion/latest/redhat-9.0/bin/ From eyeballing the RPM requirements and then doing a dry-run the packages that will need updating are... - swig (1.3.19-1.1 to 1.3.19-3) - subversion (1.0.6-1 to 1.2.3-1) - subversion-tools (1.0.6-1 to 1.2.3-1) - subversion-python (1.0.6-1 to 1.2.3-1) This additional packages needs to be installed for svn-tools: - subversion-perl (1.2.3-1) Since I cannot do any test right now for loading the dumpfile into a FSFS-based repository I suggest doing this package upgrade beforehand. It only takes a few minutes. I cannot make any guarantees that nothing will break, however. The only major upgrade to a running SVN setup that I have done was 1.1 to 1.2.1 and that was perfectly fine. How should I proceed? Go for it. But please, just to be safe, let's wait until the next round of betas is out. Hopefully, this will happen in the next couple of days. 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 )
[Zope-dev] Zope tests: 8 OK
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Mon Dec 19 12:01:02 2005 UTC to Tue Dec 20 12:01:02 2005 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Unit Tests. Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.1.3 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Mon Dec 19 20:51:25 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003802.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Mon Dec 19 20:52:56 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003803.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Mon Dec 19 20:54:26 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003804.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Mon Dec 19 20:55:56 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003805.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Mon Dec 19 20:57:26 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003806.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Mon Dec 19 20:58:56 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003807.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_9-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Mon Dec 19 21:00:26 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003808.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Mon Dec 19 21:01:56 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003809.html ___ 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: svn.zope.org borked
On 20 Dec 2005, at 11:57, Jim Fulton wrote: Since I cannot do any test right now for loading the dumpfile into a FSFS-based repository I suggest doing this package upgrade beforehand. It only takes a few minutes. I cannot make any guarantees that nothing will break, however. The only major upgrade to a running SVN setup that I have done was 1.1 to 1.2.1 and that was perfectly fine. How should I proceed? Go for it. But please, just to be safe, let's wait until the next round of betas is out. Hopefully, this will happen in the next couple of days. OK, I'll watch the situation. I have everything in place on the box for the upgrade. If all else fails I could always do the upgrade and a dump/load test on 12/25 and only proceed if it succeeds. jens ___ 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: svn.zope.org borked
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jens, I have the latest subversion-1.2.3-4 compiled for python2.3. I am happy to make them available to you if you wish. Alan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDp/1gCfroLk4EZpkRAg9jAKCAUkIuyhK1q7mrCiscfxpSM7tMwACeLt3J WIn0K8ovArTGMtcKnO+MOCw= =oFtk -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: svn.zope.org borked
On 20 Dec 2005, at 12:47, Alan Milligan wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jens, I have the latest subversion-1.2.3-4 compiled for python2.3. I am happy to make them available to you if you wish. Thanks for the help, Alan. I'm just going the route of least risk by using the same set of matching packages from that packager first - if there are problems I'll take you up on your offer ;) jens ___ 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Andreas Jung wrote: for next release we plan to replace several parts with the corresponding components from Zope 3 (e.g. ZPT´). Philipp is working on a proposal on that issue. In addition I would like to get rid of some old stuff that is no longer maintained and buggy: - ZopeTutorial (could be ripped off without implications and made available for download on zope.org) +1 - HelpSys - from a programmers view pretty much useless and not very helpful. I consider to replace it with something more useful (not sure we can re-use apidoc from Zope 3 in some way, perhaps the inclusion of Dieter's Docfinder might be more useful for programmers) +0, it would be useful to not use the explanation texts that are in the help system, or at list check that other material (docstrings, zope book) are at least as comprehensive. - Gadfly(DA) - do we really need this? We discussed this already. In my opinion the purpose of Gadfly is only educational but nothing that one really needs or uses for production. It could be removed and made available for download on zope.org. Gadfly should go, but OTOH have sqlite in its place would still provide SQL inside Zope and that could be a good plus. And my favourite enemy in Zope: ZClasses :-) I would like to mark them _clearly_ as an obsolete feature (DeprecationWarning, Warnings in the ZMI and the Zope Book). I _don't_ propose to remove them at some point but ppl should be aware that they are using one of the most-scary components in Zope (please no further discussion about the pros and cons of ZClasses..this discussion took already place already a bunch of times on the list). +1 as I don't use ZClasses and don't intend to maintain them. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 07:52:02AM +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: Hi, for next release we plan to replace several parts with the corresponding components from Zope 3 (e.g. ZPT??). Philipp is working on a proposal on that issue. In addition I would like to get rid of some old stuff that is no longer maintained and buggy: - ZopeTutorial (could be ripped off without implications and made available for download on zope.org) +1 - HelpSys - from a programmers view pretty much useless and not very helpful. I consider to replace it with something more useful (not sure we can re-use apidoc from Zope 3 in some way, perhaps the inclusion of Dieter's Docfinder might be more useful for programmers) -0 Whenever this topic comes up, people speak of HelpSys as if it's all API documentation for programmers. In fact the lion's share of it is user-oriented online structured text documentation which is IMNSHO very good to have. And many third-party products provide such documentation of their own. Especially when I was new to Zope, I read them constantly. +1 that the API docs should be extracted from interfaces and should leverage zope3 technology. See my old proposal here: http://www.zope.org/DevHome/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/SanitizeHelpSysAndAPIReference ... and the ensuing discussion: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2004-April/06.html Status of that proposal: I did a large portion of step 1 and step 5 in the 2.7 version of the Zope Book, but - as Dieter predicted - I ran out of steam long before finishing it. It's a tedious job, and I only got small amounts of help from a couple of volunteers. -1 on removing the structured text docs. I don't know if anybody actually was proposing to remove it, but since nobody mentions it, it's easy to conclude that :-) All this stuff will take work... Maybe we could have a doc sprint at pycon? - Gadfly(DA) - do we really need this? We discussed this already. In my opinion the purpose of Gadfly is only educational but nothing that one really needs or uses for production. It could be removed and made available for download on zope.org. +1 And my favourite enemy in Zope: ZClasses :-) I would like to mark them _clearly_ as an obsolete feature (DeprecationWarning, Warnings in the ZMI and the Zope Book). I _don't_ propose to remove them at some point but ppl should be aware that they are using one of the most-scary components in Zope (please no further discussion about the pros and cons of ZClasses..this discussion took already place already a bunch of times on the list). +1 -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 20. Dezember 2005 14:05:26 +0100 Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Gadfly(DA) - do we really need this? We discussed this already. In my opinion the purpose of Gadfly is only educational but nothing that one really needs or uses for production. It could be removed and made available for download on zope.org. Gadfly should go, but OTOH have sqlite in its place would still provide SQL inside Zope and that could be a good plus. This would require to move two more third-party packages into the Zope core (without having checked the licenses for the DA and the Python bindings). We discussed that issue already. Third party packages are a burden when the developers aren't active contributors to the Zope core. -aj pgp5nRg4A1VbG.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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Dec 20, 2005, at 10:36 AM, Paul Winkler wrote: - HelpSys - from a programmers view pretty much useless and not very helpful. I consider to replace it with something more useful (not sure we can re-use apidoc from Zope 3 in some way, perhaps the inclusion of Dieter's Docfinder might be more useful for programmers) -0 Whenever this topic comes up, people speak of HelpSys as if it's all API documentation for programmers. In fact the lion's share of it is user-oriented online structured text documentation which is IMNSHO very good to have. And many third-party products provide such documentation of their own. Especially when I was new to Zope, I read them constantly. In Zope 2.10 , Products packaged as Python Eggs will need either to drop support for helpsys stuff or the helpsys stuff will need to be revamped support files living in zipfiles. The former sounds saner to me and indeed Basket punts on registering help files for all egg- packaged products right now. I agree it would be helpful to have the info that's currently in the helpsystem for builtin Zope products be available somewhere else, though. - 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 20. Dezember 2005 12:27:41 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In Zope 2.10 , Products packaged as Python Eggs will need either to drop support for helpsys stuff or the helpsys stuff will need to be revamped support files living in zipfiles. The former sounds saner to me and indeed Basket punts on registering help files for all egg- packaged products right now. I agree it would be helpful to have the info that's currently in the helpsystem for builtin Zope products be available somewhere else, though. Speaking of eggs, could you please add this to the 2.10 wiki? :-) -aj pgp6LaGjLdXG6.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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Dec 20, 2005, at 12:38 PM, Andreas Jung wrote: Speaking of eggs, could you please add this to the 2.10 wiki? :-) Done... ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 12:27:41PM -0500, Chris McDonough wrote: I agree it would be helpful to have the info that's currently in the helpsystem for builtin Zope products be available somewhere else, though. I'm OK in principle with moving this stuff somewhere else, and with properly deprecating context.registerHelp(), but we do need a replacement strategy, and I don't agree that we can simply drop support for help in third-party products. It's not just builtin products that are affected. I also think that keeping it online is a good thing. It's very convenient and you don't have to worry about e.g. linux distributions getting funny with where they decide to place things like bundled documentation files, or free/budget zope hosting plans where you may not even have ready access to the filesystem. Maybe if we don't want to bundle them, we could host them in a versioned hierarchy on zope.org, like the way old versions of Python docs are always available on python.org. Of course, that puts some pressure on zope.org to be up and responsive all the time... that's another topic ;-P btw, I don't think we should keep shoe-horning the API docs and online user docs into the same UI. It doesn't feel like a good fit in the current system. Maybe the current Help! link should point only to user docs, and there should be a separate link to the new Interface docs? -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 01:24:32PM -0500, Paul Winkler wrote: Maybe if we don't want to bundle them, we could host them in a versioned hierarchy on zope.org, like the way old versions of Python docs are always available on python.org. ... which, duh, doesn't handle help for third-party products. So this is a non-solution. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 20. Dezember 2005 13:32:02 -0500 Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 01:24:32PM -0500, Paul Winkler wrote: Maybe if we don't want to bundle them, we could host them in a versioned hierarchy on zope.org, like the way old versions of Python docs are always available on python.org. ... which, duh, doesn't handle help for third-party products. So this is a non-solution. I mentioned already Apidoc from Z3. One way would be to move the API descriptions of the Zope code into interface files (I don't know how much code in Zope has no interfaces so far...we could possibly autogenerate interface files from code). As far as I can see Apidoc in Z3 gets its information from the registered components and their interfaces. Possibly we could replace the registration of a product with the HelpSys with *some* registry which might be used by Apidoc (Apidoc looks very generic). *Possibly* we could register the STX file with this registry as well just-loud-thinking, -aj pgpPj4J1nES3k.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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 08:13:18PM +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: --On 20. Dezember 2005 13:32:02 -0500 Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 01:24:32PM -0500, Paul Winkler wrote: Maybe if we don't want to bundle them, we could host them in a versioned hierarchy on zope.org, like the way old versions of Python docs are always available on python.org. ... which, duh, doesn't handle help for third-party products. So this is a non-solution. I mentioned already Apidoc from Z3. OK, but as I keep saying, that only covers half of the problem. One way would be to move the API descriptions of the Zope code into interface files (I don't know how much code in Zope has no interfaces so far... I have no idea, but there are already quite a lot of z3 interfaces in zope 2.9. As far as I can see Apidoc in Z3 gets its information from the registered components and their interfaces. Possibly we could replace the registration of a product with the HelpSys with *some* registry which might be used by Apidoc (Apidoc looks very generic). *Possibly* we could register the STX file with this registry as well ok... but as I said, I'm also wondering if help stx files should go in some parallel tree and not be mixed up with API docs at all. But maybe we could still leverage Apidoc for this tree somehow? I'm totally hand-waving here... just to be clear, the stuff I'm talking about is ZMI user interface docs, not programmer docs. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 20. Dezember 2005 14:27:18 -0500 Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just to be clear, the stuff I'm talking about is ZMI user interface docs, not programmer docs. I'll raise the question again: what are the benefits of the HelpSys for a Zope user? I just clicked through the HelpSys (I've never used and missed it throughout my Zope career) and all the unorganized information in the HelpSys are more or less in the same way available in the Zope Book (ZPT, DTML references etc.). The HelpSys presents the information just in an unusable and insane way...so I wonder what is the value of this crap? Would it hurt someone when we remove it? How many percent of the ppl using Zope - either through the ZMI or the filesystem - actually use this information source (it's more an information sink)? My theory: a) ppl never read documentation b) ppl read the Zope Book because we point them to the Zope Book as primary Zope resource. At least the Zope Book is somewhat maintained. The HelpSys docs were not update in the past as far as I can remember. My proposal would be: - forget the HelpSys forever - let's try to (auto)-generate interfaces from the existing code as the primary source for API related documentation - additional information and story telling should be done through doc tests - create an _optional_ replacement for HelpSys (Apidoc-based or whatever) -aj pgpfCFCFhKRlk.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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 08:47:34PM +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: --On 20. Dezember 2005 14:27:18 -0500 Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just to be clear, the stuff I'm talking about is ZMI user interface docs, not programmer docs. I'll raise the question again: what are the benefits of the HelpSys for a Zope user? I just clicked through the HelpSys (I've never used and missed it throughout my Zope career) and all the unorganized information in the HelpSys are more or less in the same way available in the Zope Book (ZPT, DTML references etc.). The big difference is that in many places in the ZMI, clicking help takes you to instructions *for the management page you are actually looking at*. Just because you and I have internalized all this information long ago does not mean it isn't useful to new users. I haven't looked at any of it recently because I don't need to anymore. But I remember when I *did* need to. The users affected most by this change are not going to be on zope-dev. Maybe I was a rare case and nobody else ever reads the help pages. I don't think we will find out by arguing about it here. Maybe a straw poll on the main zope list would teach us something? Something like Did you, at some point while learning Zope, get anything useful from the help system?. - additional information and story telling should be done through doc tests For general what is this / what does it do / how does it work docs, I like that idea. But it doesn't help with filling out forms in the ZMI. Arguably, forms should be self-documenting, but the nice thing about a help link is that it doesn't distract you when you don't need it any more. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:47, Andreas Jung wrote: --On 20. Dezember 2005 14:27:18 -0500 Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just to be clear, the stuff I'm talking about is ZMI user interface docs, not programmer docs. I'll raise the question again: what are the benefits of the HelpSys for a Zope user? I would say the only benefit was the unification of docs for Zope and installed third party products in one place, and its context- sensitivity for documenting screens in the ZMI when you're on them by clicking the link. I've always tried to be good about it, and most of my software has relatively up-to-date HelpSys documentation. On the other hand I believe most product authors don't use HelpSys documentation, and the Zope-provided pieces are way less current and informative than the Zope book (2.7 version). IMHO it would be nice if the HelpSys could be changed so that it still provides those Help! links, but the product author can simply assign a URL to them to point to a place where they copied and pasted their docs into a website. That's not too much of an imposition on product authors I think. jens ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 20. Dezember 2005 15:09:56 -0500 Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - additional information and story telling should be done through doc tests For general what is this / what does it do / how does it work docs, I like that idea. But it doesn't help with filling out forms in the ZMI. Arguably, forms should be self-documenting, but the nice thing about a help link is that it doesn't distract you when you don't need it any more. I've never met ppl who actually used the HelpSys so that's why I am raising the question about the value of the HelpSys. Lots of my co-workers work with Zope on different levels (scripters, product developers)...I've always pointed them to the Zope Book...the HelpSys was never a topic. -aj pgpD1FQua65Ux.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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 08:18:18PM +, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: I would say the only benefit was the unification of docs for Zope and installed third party products in one place, Good point! and its context- sensitivity for documenting screens in the ZMI when you're on them by clicking the link. I've always tried to be good about it, and most of my software has relatively up-to-date HelpSys documentation. Me too. On the other hand I believe most product authors don't use HelpSys documentation, and the Zope-provided pieces are way less current and informative than the Zope book (2.7 version). Yes. I think we as a community have a general documentation maintenance problem. It is something that neither ZC nor the community at large has placed sufficient value on - understandably! Free docs don't pay anybody's bills. There needs to be a driving force here stronger than it would be nice to have better docs, or there never will be. Maybe once the Zope Foundation is up and running, I will propose that the Foundation play a role. Maybe fundraising and earmarking funds for doc work would help. (... oh crap, I forgot about the foundation chat today. Probably would have been OT at this stage anyway.) IMHO it would be nice if the HelpSys could be changed so that it still provides those Help! links, but the product author can simply assign a URL to them to point to a place where they copied and pasted their docs into a website. That's not too much of an imposition on product authors I think. I think that would work. If so, the question then becomes: timetable and plan for deprecating HelpSys. I don't think we can simply rip out registerHelp() in 2.10 unless we have deprecation warnings in 2.9; and a useful deprecation warning requires something in place we can advise people to do instead. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Dec 20, 2005, at 3:29 PM, Paul Winkler wrote: If so, the question then becomes: timetable and plan for deprecating HelpSys. I don't think we can simply rip out registerHelp() in 2.10 unless we have deprecation warnings in 2.9; and a useful deprecation warning requires something in place we can advise people to do instead. FWIW, I have zero plans to support a registerHelp that does anything but pass or warn for Egg products. If people think that isn't a reasonable thing to do, I may need to take my committment to integrating eggs off the table for 2.10 personally; of course others would be free to take the existing code and integrate. IOW, I intend to spend exactly zero brain cycles thinking about help system issues except to make it inoperable. ;-) - 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 03:58:05PM -0500, Chris McDonough wrote: FWIW, I have zero plans to support a registerHelp that does anything but pass or warn for Egg products. If people think that isn't a reasonable thing to do, I may need to take my committment to integrating eggs off the table for 2.10 personally; of course others would be free to take the existing code and integrate. IOW, I intend to spend exactly zero brain cycles thinking about help system issues except to make it inoperable. ;-) Hmm... Since eggs are a relatively new distribution mechanism, it doesn't make sense for basket (or whatever it evolves into) to waste effort on supporting old crap that's going away sooner or later. But I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that in order to use Basket, my product can't call registerHelp()? Or are you saying that when installed via Basket, registerHelp() does nothing? That's fine. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
On Dec 20, 2005, at 4:22 PM, Paul Winkler wrote: But I'm not sure I understand you. Are you saying that in order to use Basket, my product can't call registerHelp()? Or are you saying that when installed via Basket, registerHelp() does nothing? That's fine. Yep, the latter currently... ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Andreas Jung wrote: I've never met ppl who actually used the HelpSys so that's why I am raising the question about the value of the HelpSys. Lots of my co-workers work with Zope on different levels (scripters, product developers)...I've always pointed them to the Zope Book...the HelpSys was never a topic. I most commonly use the HurtSys for DateTime's api, and some of the idnexing apis. That said, I also agree it should die if something nicer comes along ;-) cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Andreas Jung wrote: I'll raise the question again: what are the benefits of the HelpSys for a Zope user? I can't recall clicking on top frame of the ZMI or a 'Help!' link in the past few years, either. Perhaps an equivalent or greater benefit would be to rip out locally installed static help facilities, and spend the effort migrating* zope.org to a plone version that could run PloneHelpCenter: http://plone.org/documentation * or a clean-slate docs.zope.org, just as well. ___ 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] buildbot failure in Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 2376 Blamelist: anguenot,efge,frerich,hdima,jim,poster BUILD FAILED: failed test sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ 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] buildbot failure in Zope branches 2.9 2.4 Windows 2000 zc-bbwin
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope branches 2.9 2.4 Windows 2000 zc-bbwin. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 2375 Blamelist: anguenot,efge,frerich,hdima,jim,philikon,poster BUILD FAILED: failed test sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ 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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Jens Vagelpohl schrieb: ... IMHO it would be nice if the HelpSys could be changed so that it still provides those Help! links, but the product author can simply assign a URL to them to point to a place where they copied and pasted their docs into a website. That's not too much of an imposition on product authors I think. This was my first thought but then you have two problems: 1) online docs can be for new version while the user is for various reasons using older version - so the docs would not match either 2) privacy: this is the biggest issue - if someone clicks on the helpsys link (s)he transmits the url of the own ZMI via referrer (in 99% of all cases). This might be ok for zope.org, but I doubt this is ok for anybody elses website where who knows has access to the logs. I fear unless we play some ugly javascript games, there is no real way out of this. Maybe at least the url should be restricted to 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 )
[Zope-dev] buildbot failure in Zope trunk 2.4 Windows 2000 zc-bbwin
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope trunk 2.4 Windows 2000 zc-bbwin. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 2376 Blamelist: anguenot,efge,frerich,hdima,jim,poster BUILD FAILED: failed test sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ 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 )
