[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: 2421 Blamelist: andreasjung 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 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: 2421 Blamelist: andreasjung 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: svn.zope.org borked
On 21 Dec 2005, at 16:15, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: With this upgrade in place I will do a new dry-run for the FSFS backend migration tomorrow morning. The test run ran through without any problems. Here's some stats: - dumping the existing repository took 12 minutes and resulted in a 1.1 GB file - loading the file into a new fsfs-based repo took 31 minutes. The resulting repository is 662 MB in size. As Tim predicted, this is smaller then the BDB-based repo, which is 711 MB now. Jim, if you want to take a look at this new repository, it's under / root/fakesvn. Barring any complaints I'll go ahead with the conversion this coming Sunday, December 25th. 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
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] I'll note, FWIW, that we don't do installs from Zope 3 checkouts. Yes, this is understood. I think it's worth asking whether this is an important requirement. Perhaps more generally, how important is it that the repository reflects the released version of the software, and how close can we get? First we'd need to agree on at least the principle that a checkout is ideally equivalent to a kind of 'sumo release' of Zope that includes everything, and builds as such, and acts like such a release. I realize that reaching such a point practically may be hard, just wondering if we can at least get some agreement on the ideal situation. If it is, then we should make it work. Question is, is it worth delaying the release? I don't know. It's not worth delaying the release, if at least in the release the dance continues to work, which I understand it does (and certainly did for the beta). I do think it's important though, but nothing is worth delaying the release and I expect fixing this would shake up things. If we did stay with the current situation, we'd need to cleanup the documentation so that a developer can easily reminder herself what she can do and how to do it. Yes, an obscure error is not very helpful, and I already know of several people who ran into it independently. Now there's this thread that people can find, but that won't be the case in the future... It'd be best the error message was a bit more clear, if at all possible, though I can imagine reaching that would also be hard. People won't be looking into the docs very quickly when they run into an obscure error, as this works with a release and you'd expect it to work with a checkout too -- this is an expectation people get from other projects. Regards, Martijn ___ 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
Jim Fulton wrote: I'll note that, as a developer, I have never done this and probably never would want to do this. How do you test 'mkzopeinstance' then? Build a release first? That's rather cumbersome. Anyway, small point. The only use case for this is a deployer of Zope that wants to install an unreleased revision of Zope. If this use case is driving this, a better solution might be to build automatic snapshot releases. I want to be able to work in zope instances, no matter what version of zope, released or unreleased, I'm dealing with. I don't see how I should do this right now. I think there's a broader use case than this, however: I think it's important to make the transition between the repository world and the released version world as small as possible. This is an expectation that people have from other projects, and in my opinion Zope should strive to let that expectation work for Zope. Zope may have special distribution requirements indeed, but are they special enough to raise the barrier for people who want to become developers? I realize that there is more than one distribution from the same repository, but if we just stick to the philosophy that there's one 'default' experience that you get when you use an svn checkout, then it makes sense for that experience to be as similar to a Zope 2 release tarball as possible. Regards, Martijn ___ 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
Andreas Jung wrote: Who has the knowledge and time to fix this? I think we need to have some philosophical agreement on what is going to be done before we figure out who has time to fix this. I think the issue is a bit deeper than just a bug people want fix, even though it presents itself that way. The requirements that zpkg tries to fulfill, primarily multiple distributions from the same repository, have given us this situation. Perhaps we should revisit zpkg and add the requirement that the state of the repository should be as similar as possible to that of at least *one* of those distributions, and see what happens to its design. Fixing this should be part of the Zope 2.10 cycle, hopefully. I can interpret your question another way, as a count against zpkg: zpkg is so peculiar to Zope that even most Zope core developers don't know how to fix this. That sucks and in my book is a very serious negative point against zpkg. The simplicity of repository *is* distribution has a very important benefit in its favor there, as that's trivial to understand. Regards, Martijn ___ 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
r --On 22. Dezember 2005 12:06:09 +0100 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: Who has the knowledge and time to fix this? I think we need to have some philosophical agreement on what is going to be done before we figure out who has time to fix this. I think the issue is a bit deeper than just a bug people want fix, even though it presents itself that way. Of course the issue is deeper but I have no idea how deep :-) The requirements that zpkg tries to fulfill, primarily multiple distributions from the same repository, have given us this situation. Perhaps we should revisit zpkg and add the requirement that the state of the repository should be as similar as possible to that of at least *one* of those distributions, and see what happens to its design. Fixing this should be part of the Zope 2.10 cycle, hopefully. Jup, I don't consider it is blocker for 2.9.0 although it might/will cause some trouble. I can interpret your question another way, as a count against zpkg: zpkg is so peculiar to Zope that even most Zope core developers don't know how to fix this. That sucks and in my book is a very serious negative point against zpkg. The simplicity of repository *is* distribution has a very important benefit in its favor there, as that's trivial to understand. I am not against zpkg but I have really no idea how it works, what is does for me and how it causes the particular trouble in this case..at the moment zpkg is just a magic black box with some esoteric functionalityto make it short: I need to learn what zpkg is and how it works. Until then ppl with some zpkg skills need to care about the problem. Andreas pgpKV1N5d6myA.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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Rocky Burt wrote: Max M wrote: If there is another practical way to do it, that would be fine too. I don't know about sqllite. But if it's more difficulte than dropping a package into a directory it would be bad. Personally I'd be a huge proponent of including SQLite in zope core. It is extraordinarilly functional and has few requirements. I particularly like using it to ensure unit tests against RDBMS connections work properly. Requiring a user to install postgresql just to run the unit tests of a product is somewhat unfeasible. - Rocky I would like that. Whenever giving a Zope/Plone class I end up using gadfly since this is the only db every one attending can use. As gadfly is very limited, it would be great to have something a bit more powerful. I would like to help making this possible. Robert ___ 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: 2423 Blamelist: andreasjung 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] Directory structure on svn.zope.org
The top-level directory structure on svn.zope.org appears a bit messy to me. There we have the folders for the large projects CMF, Zope, Zope3 and lots modules that possibly don't belong there. Wouldn't it make sense to move them into a dedicated Zope3-modules folder (or choose another name)? Andreas pgps4GeRnt9YX.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 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: 2424 Blamelist: andreasjung 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
robert rottermann schrieb: Rocky Burt wrote: Max M wrote: If there is another practical way to do it, that would be fine too. I don't know about sqllite. But if it's more difficulte than dropping a package into a directory it would be bad. Personally I'd be a huge proponent of including SQLite in zope core. It is extraordinarilly functional and has few requirements. I particularly like using it to ensure unit tests against RDBMS connections work properly. Requiring a user to install postgresql just to run the unit tests of a product is somewhat unfeasible. I dont think we should inlcude more 3rd party products into zope core unless they are required for core funtionality. And a random database adaptor isnt really core functionality. Linking interesting products from the download-page could be improved to fill the gap imho. Regards Tino ___ 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: 2423 Blamelist: andreasjung 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 22. Dezember 2005 12:32:07 +0100 Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont think we should inlcude more 3rd party products into zope core unless they are required for core funtionality. And a random database adaptor isnt really core functionality. Another point: with Zope 2.10 we want to replace more and more duplicate code from the Zope 2 core with Zope 3 code. Since out-of-the-box RDBMS functionality might be off interest for the Zope 3 community it should be part of the Zope 3 (to be re-used within Zope 2). I think that would be the way to go if there is consensus about the necessity for having Sqlite in Zope 2/3 (the license issue is still an open point). -aj pgpq9SWG6XqeH.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 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: 2428 Blamelist: andreasjung 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 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: 2424 Blamelist: andreasjung 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] Zope tests: 8 OK
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Dec 21 12:01:01 2005 UTC to Thu Dec 22 12:01:01 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: Wed Dec 21 21:01:41 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003818.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 21 21:03:11 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003819.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 21 21:04:41 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003820.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 21 21:06:11 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003821.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 21 21:07:41 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003822.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 21 21:09:12 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003823.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_9-branch Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 21 21:10:42 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003824.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.2 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Wed Dec 21 21:12:12 EST 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003825.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 )
[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: 2428 Blamelist: andreasjung 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
--On 20. Dezember 2005 16:41:37 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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... You could please describe what the implications between Basket and Helpys are? I would like to prototype something using Apidoc over the next days. But I need to know what the constraints are. -aj pgpCG5Eqh5VaL.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 22, 2005, at 8:26 AM, Andreas Jung wrote: --On 20. Dezember 2005 16:41:37 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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... You could please describe what the implications between Basket and Helpys are? Egg products may be run from a zipfile (this is a distribution; it might contain more than one product). Egg distributions can be marked as non-zip-safe, in which case Basket will uncompress them to a cache directory before adding them to the product path (although the Products package namespace is not required for egg products). But the some products will be run entirely from a zipfile without decompressing them. Helpsys expects to be able to find help files on disk. pkg_resources is a module by Phillip Eby that can used to indirect file access through a separate API that makes it possible to read files from either a zipfile or from a directory path. Fred also wrote a package named zope.filereference which does the same. I suspect you may need to change apidoc to use one of these APIs when it's finding and reading files. - 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] Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
I'm looking for opinions here.. The next major Zope 2 release and perhaps the next major Zope 3 release will support the loading of packages and (for Zope 2) Products from Python Egg files. See http://peak.telecommunity.com/ DevCenter/PythonEggs for an overview. This provides the following benefits: - A packaging pattern that includes standardized metadata which extends existing distutils patterns. - A mechanism to find certain kinds of packages (via egg entry points). This is important for Zope 2 because it means we can make the use of the Products package namespace optional.. Products needn't be installed into Products IOW. - Simpler installation (more than one product can exist in a single egg file). - Dependencies between distributions (different egg files) may exist within the standard metadata, and the egg loading machinery can detect whether a dependency is missing. - Egg products can be registered with online catalogs like Cheese Shop, etc very simply. A spike solution for egg support in Zope 2 in the form of a product named Basket (http://www.plope.com/software/Basket/Basket) already exists. By doing this, we know a lot more about what it will take to put egg support in to the core. Currently, the Basket product makes the following important assumptions: - There should be no explicit installation step for eggs other than placing the egg on somewhere on Zope's PYTHONPATH. - Packagers can mark their distributions as non-zip-safe, which causes Basket to automatically unpack the egg file into disk files in a cache directory when Zope starts. This is important for existing products that expect some of their data files to be on disk and not in the egg zipfile. The progenitor of Eggs (Phillip Eby) suggests that this is too implicit. He suggests instead that people who install packages should use a program which implicitly installs packages. The major difference between this and what happens in Basket currently is that packages would be that non-zip-safe packages would be exploded at installation time rather than at Zope startup time. The question is this: do you think there should be an explicit install step for egg packages/Products or do you think it should be possible to just put eggs on your PYTHONPATH (and perhaps adjust a config file with requirements)? ___ 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: 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 Or write a new tutorial. - 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) +1 Never used it. - 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 Gadfly is nice to experiment with SQL programming, you can even run small SQL apps (guestbook, small forum, etc.) with it. And it's easy to replace is with a more serious replacement afterwards. I've used it whenever I needed SQL support in Zope, either in development mode or in hack something quickly mode. 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 S. -- Stéfane Fermigier, Tel: +33 (0)6 63 04 12 77 (mobile). Nuxeo Collaborative Portal Server: http://www.nuxeo.com/cps Gestion de contenu web / portail collaboratif / groupware / open source! ___ 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] Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
Chris McDonough wrote: I'm looking for opinions here.. The progenitor of Eggs (Phillip Eby) suggests that this is too implicit. He suggests instead that people who install packages should use a program which implicitly installs packages. The major difference between this and what happens in Basket currently is that packages would be that non-zip-safe packages would be exploded at installation time rather than at Zope startup time. The question is this: do you think there should be an explicit install step for egg packages/Products or do you think it should be possible to just put eggs on your PYTHONPATH (and perhaps adjust a config file with requirements)? As you know, I have created an egg for CPS recently (http://blogs.nuxeo.com/sections/blogs/fermigier/2005_12_16_cps-lays-big-egg) The egg is big (12.3M) and exploding the egg at Zope on startup takes quite a long time (1 minute IIRC). But from a administration POW, I would prefer the implicit approach. Regarding the startup time problem, I would vote for a timestamping system (I don't even know if it's not the case already). S. -- Stéfane Fermigier, Tel: +33 (0)6 63 04 12 77 (mobile). Nuxeo Collaborative Portal Server: http://www.nuxeo.com/cps Gestion de contenu web / portail collaboratif / groupware / open source! ___ 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] Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
--On 22. Dezember 2005 09:09:02 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is this: do you think there should be an explicit install step for egg packages/Products or do you think it should be possible to just put eggs on your PYTHONPATH (and perhaps adjust a config file with requirements)? I think the installation should be explicit. In Zope 3 you have to configure package/products through ZCML, in CMF/Plone you need to use the quickinstaller toolso as Guido tought us: explicit is better than implicit :-) -aj pgpoH9f1enDzj.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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 22. Dezember 2005 12:32:07 +0100 Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont think we should inlcude more 3rd party products into zope core unless they are required for core funtionality. And a random database adaptor isnt really core functionality. Another point: with Zope 2.10 we want to replace more and more duplicate code from the Zope 2 core with Zope 3 code. Since out-of-the-box RDBMS functionality might be off interest for the Zope 3 community it should be part of the Zope 3 (to be re-used within Zope 2). I think that would be the way to go if there is consensus about the necessity for having Sqlite in Zope 2/3 (the license issue is still an open point). -aj I perfectly agree with both of these arguments. However having a dead easy to use RDBMS tool is very convenient. Both for teaching and marketing purposes. Robert ___ 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] Modifiying the bootstrap Data.fs?
Does anyone know how to modify the bootstrap Data.fs that is installed after a new Zope installation and how to modify the Zope Quickstart page? -aj pgpOQIS1FhaaI.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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 22. Dezember 2005 15:20:27 +0100 robert rottermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I perfectly agree with both of these arguments. However having a dead easy to use RDBMS tool is very convenient. Both for teaching and marketing purposes. I agree (meanwhile) but we have to sort out the issues I mentioned already (license, integration with Z 3, who volunteers :-)) -aj pgpFXMAhkrn4e.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] Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
On Dec 22, 2005, at 9:16 AM, Stefane Fermigier wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: I'm looking for opinions here.. The progenitor of Eggs (Phillip Eby) suggests that this is too implicit. He suggests instead that people who install packages should use a program which implicitly installs packages. The major difference between this and what happens in Basket currently is that packages would be that non-zip-safe packages would be exploded at installation time rather than at Zope startup time. The question is this: do you think there should be an explicit install step for egg packages/Products or do you think it should be possible to just put eggs on your PYTHONPATH (and perhaps adjust a config file with requirements)? As you know, I have created an egg for CPS recently (http://blogs.nuxeo.com/sections/blogs/fermigier/2005_12_16_cps- lays-big-egg) Yes, this is cool! ;-) The egg is big (12.3M) and exploding the egg at Zope on startup takes quite a long time (1 minute IIRC). That's not too surprising. I guess we could make that faster by using an external zip program (not one written in Python). That said, if the package was zip safe it wouldn't need to be blasted apart of course. But from a administration POW, I would prefer the implicit approach. Regarding the startup time problem, I would vote for a timestamping system (I don't even know if it's not the case already). There's one in there now as of Basket 0.2... - 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] Modifiying the bootstrap Data.fs?
AFAIK, there is no Data.fs.in file anymore and the OFS.Application logic creates all the objects it needs at startup time. Quickstart text is in lib/python/App/dtml/zope_quick_start.dtml (it's not read from ZODB at all). - C On Dec 22, 2005, at 9:26 AM, Andreas Jung wrote: Does anyone know how to modify the bootstrap Data.fs that is installed after a new Zope installation and how to modify the Zope Quickstart page? -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 )
[Zope-dev] Zope Book 2.7 edition
Chris, what do you think about moving the current version of the ZB hosted on plope.com back on zope.org. The quickstart page of Zope still points to the 2.6 edition. I would like to get of the 2.6 edition and call it just Zope Book + the data of the last modification. Since we can not synchronize Zope release with the Zope Book it would make sense to me to get rid of the version numberI think it is confusing to distinguish between the 2.6 and 2.7 edition (when there is already Zope 2.8) and versions hosted on zope.org vs. plope.com. -aj pgpwCh4ej222o.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] Modifiying the bootstrap Data.fs?
--On 22. Dezember 2005 09:48:01 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: AFAIK, there is no Data.fs.in file anymore and the OFS.Application logic creates all the objects it needs at startup time. Quickstart text is in lib/python/App/dtml/zope_quick_start.dtml (it's not read from ZODB at all). Yeah, I found it meanwhile...somehow grep -r fooled me. -aj pgpr4SzKgiU43.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: Zope Book 2.7 edition
That's fine. It moved to plope.com because it was under pretty heavy development and zope.org was (and probably still is) too slow to be responsive when lots of writes were done. IIRC its DAV was broken too. It's not under development at all anymore, so it can move back, at least until another development cycle comes up. Zope.org will need the latest version of BackTalk and CMFBackTalk installed (and by latest I wouldn't worry that they're too new to run on Zope.org, both are at least two years old). Can someone do this? Upgrading BackTalk might just be a matter of typing cvs up in the BackTalk product directory... if it's not, there's no release that has the necessary features, so it will need to be checked out or a tarball will need to be rolled from http://cvs.sourceforge.net/ viewcvs.py/backtalk/BackTalk/ . CMFBackTalk... same for CMFBackTalk at http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/collective/CMFBackTalk/ . - C On Dec 22, 2005, at 9:48 AM, Andreas Jung wrote: Chris, what do you think about moving the current version of the ZB hosted on plope.com back on zope.org. The quickstart page of Zope still points to the 2.6 edition. I would like to get of the 2.6 edition and call it just Zope Book + the data of the last modification. Since we can not synchronize Zope release with the Zope Book it would make sense to me to get rid of the version numberI think it is confusing to distinguish between the 2.6 and 2.7 edition (when there is already Zope 2.8) and versions hosted on zope.org vs. plope.com. -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] 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: 2429 Blamelist: andreasjung 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] Re: zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
Martijn Faassen wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I agree. I am also not happy with that. Unfortunately I have currently no clue how to solve this issue (no idea about zpkg). WHat you can do is the following: - copy the checkout to the location where your software home should be - run configure; make inplace; make instance Doesn't work for me; I don't have a bin/mkzopeinstance after this procedure so I still cannot create instances. Sigh. I use utilities/mkzopeinstance.py (until moves again...) 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] Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
On Dec 22, 2005, at 9:20 AM, Andreas Jung wrote: --On 22. Dezember 2005 09:09:02 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The question is this: do you think there should be an explicit install step for egg packages/Products or do you think it should be possible to just put eggs on your PYTHONPATH (and perhaps adjust a config file with requirements)? I think the installation should be explicit. In Zope 3 you have to configure package/products through ZCML, in CMF/Plone you need to use the quickinstaller toolso as Guido tought us: explicit is better than implicit :-) I did forget to mention one thing... currently you can specify *which* products you want to activate at startup via a listing of requirements in a configuration file. This is another vector of explicitness unrelated to how the program got installed. - 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 22. Dezember 2005 15:20:27 +0100 robert rottermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I perfectly agree with both of these arguments. However having a dead easy to use RDBMS tool is very convenient. Both for teaching and marketing purposes. I agree (meanwhile) but we have to sort out the issues I mentioned already (license, integration with Z 3, who volunteers :-)) Hmm... I'm definitely willing to help out here. But one strike against me is my lack of zope3 development knowledge. When you mentioned before about importing sqlite into svn.zope.org, you were talking about actually including a snapshot of sqlite inside zope source rather than making it a build time requirement? - Rocky -- Rocky Burt ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com ServerZen Hosting -- http://www.serverzenhosting.net News About The Server -- http://www.serverzen.net ___ 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: 2429 Blamelist: andreasjung 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] Re: Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
Chris McDonough wrote: The question is this: do you think there should be an explicit install step for egg packages/Products or do you think it should be possible to just put eggs on your PYTHONPATH (and perhaps adjust a config file with requirements)? To be honest, the explicit'ness of an external egg install process irks me but I cannot really give a reason why (perhaps its just because I'm used to having Zope2 products just work). Also, with having to install eggs, how would this work with eggs that are actually directories (that are formed like egg zip files) and dealing with eggs from a development standpoint. Does this mean they would get copied some place? Or just that something would be registered into the zodb registering those eggs, etc... - Rocky -- Rocky Burt ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com ServerZen Hosting -- http://www.serverzenhosting.net News About The Server -- http://www.serverzen.net ___ 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] clockserver
What happens if the request started by clockserver takes a long time or hangs? Will the next tick start a new one anyway, or will it be blocked? 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 22. Dezember 2005 11:42:30 -0330 Rocky Burt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When you mentioned before about importing sqlite into svn.zope.org, you were talking about actually including a snapshot of sqlite inside zope source rather than making it a build time requirement? I really don't care about how to do it..this would be up to the volunteer. But the license issue must be discussed since you are not allowed to import non-ZPL code to svn.zope.org. -aj pgpjs6YAaZ0cs.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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 08:37:22AM +0100, Dario Lopez-K?sten wrote: +1 on this. It is important for us in the forced to be both developer and deployer by evil sysadmins camp. I'm one of those guys too. I'm sure I can learn to live with the 2.9 release layout but right now it's just confusing. I think one reason people are just now starting to complain is that we had no idea this change was coming. Checkouts don't look any different, so it was a bit of a surprise to see such a big change in the tarball. I'm sure this was discussed in some thread somewhere but it evidently didn't register for me. -- 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: clockserver
The next tick will happen regardless, because handle invokes a publisher thread (it doesn't block). On Dec 22, 2005, at 10:23 AM, Florent Guillaume wrote: What happens if the request started by clockserver takes a long time or hangs? Will the next tick start a new one anyway, or will it be blocked? 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] Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
Forwarding to the list for chewing... ;-) On Dec 22, 2005, at 10:21 AM, Phillip J. Eby wrote: At 10:08 AM 12/22/2005 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote: The progenitor of Eggs (Phillip Eby) suggests that this is too implicit. He suggests instead that people who install packages should use a program which implicitly installs packages. The major difference between this and what happens in Basket currently is that packages would be that non-zip-safe packages would be exploded at installation time rather than at Zope startup time. *And* you can get dependencies checked, downloaded, md5's verified, etc. at that installation time, too. ___ 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: Zope Book 2.7 edition
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 09:59:54AM -0500, Chris McDonough wrote: Zope.org will need the latest version of BackTalk and CMFBackTalk installed (and by latest I wouldn't worry that they're too new to run on Zope.org, both are at least two years old). I would like to point out to whoever undertakes this task: You will want to cache the heck out of the backtalk pages. The index of sections is likely to be rather expensive. -- 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] Re: Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
On Dec 22, 2005, at 10:17 AM, Rocky Burt wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: The question is this: do you think there should be an explicit install step for egg packages/Products or do you think it should be possible to just put eggs on your PYTHONPATH (and perhaps adjust a config file with requirements)? To be honest, the explicit'ness of an external egg install process irks me but I cannot really give a reason why (perhaps its just because I'm used to having Zope2 products just work). What do Java people expect from jar files (I ask as a Java dope)? Do they have a more limited scope (no dependencies, for example?) Also, with having to install eggs, how would this work with eggs that are actually directories (that are formed like egg zip files) and dealing with eggs from a development standpoint. Does this mean they would get copied some place? Or just that something would be registered into the zodb registering those eggs, etc... I doubt anything would go into the ZODB; other than that I'm not sure. Whatever got created would almost certainly be based on Phillip's easy_install program which is documented at http:// peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/EasyInstall . - 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: Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
--On 22. Dezember 2005 10:46:42 -0500 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do Java people expect from jar files (I ask as a Java dope)? Do they have a more limited scope (no dependencies, for example?) Jar files have no dependencies. -aj pgpKlIVHcdQM0.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: Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
On 12/22/05, Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jar files have no dependencies. Well, I know you know what you mean here, but I'll elaborate since the kids haven't started fighting yet this morning. :-) Jar files don't have dependency metadata. They're pretty much equivalent to zipped Python libraries. Python Eggs take the next step by adding the dependency information and other interesting bits in the support infrastructure. I'm sure there's a Java equivalent (or several), but I've not heard of it. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr.fdrake at gmail.com There is no wealth but life. --John Ruskin ___ 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: Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
Chris McDonough wrote: What do Java people expect from jar files (I ask as a Java dope)? Do they have a more limited scope (no dependencies, for example?) Coming from a heavy java/j2ee background I can say that people in java-land expect to place jar's on the java classpath (equivalent of pythonpath) and they just work with regard to showing up on the classpath. Taking this one step further, a Zope2 product egg would be closer to a J2EE ear (Enterprise ARchive) file rather than a Java jar file. An ear file is basically a jar file with extra metadata stating that it follows the appropriate conventions for j2ee deployment (basically instructions on which parts of the ear file are for ejb management, more for web file management, etc). Now the best question is, do ear files get automatically configured and installed by a j2ee server? Answer: It depends. This is comppletely up to the j2ee server implementation. Orion and JBoss for example (full j2ee implementations) have a special directory where you can simply drop ear files and they get automatically get picked up by the server and deployed as applications/components. But, having said that, I know for a fact that the preferred manner to configure an ear file with Orion is to do it explicitly in Orion's xml configuration files. Hopefully that sheds some light. Regarding dependencies, no, jar/war/ear files (java's zip file types) do not have dependency configuration although they do have the ability to use something else if it exists (you can specify a Class-Path argument in the manifest file). - Rocky -- Rocky Burt ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com ServerZen Hosting -- http://www.serverzenhosting.net News About The Server -- http://www.serverzen.net ___ 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: Product installation (implicit vs. explicit)
Fred Drake wrote: On 12/22/05, Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jar files have no dependencies. Well, I know you know what you mean here, but I'll elaborate since the kids haven't started fighting yet this morning. :-) Jar files don't have dependency metadata. They're pretty much equivalent to zipped Python libraries. Python Eggs take the next step by adding the dependency information and other interesting bits in the support infrastructure. I'm sure there's a Java equivalent (or several), but I've not heard of it. There is one, and it is a very powerful and mature. Or so I have been told by my good friend and coworker Eric Barroca. It's called OSGi (http://www.osgi.org/) It is used for set top boxes applications provisionning, as well as for assembling components in the Eclipse platform (including Eclipse RCP) which, according to another good friend and coworker (Julien Anguenot) shares some similarities with the Zope 3 component architecture. http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/442/gruber.pdf http://www.eclipse.org/org/press-release/20051011osgi.htm S. -- Stéfane Fermigier, Tel: +33 (0)6 63 04 12 77 (mobile). Nuxeo Collaborative Portal Server: http://www.nuxeo.com/cps Gestion de contenu web / portail collaboratif / groupware / open source! ___ 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: --On 22. Dezember 2005 11:42:30 -0330 Rocky Burt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When you mentioned before about importing sqlite into svn.zope.org, you were talking about actually including a snapshot of sqlite inside zope source rather than making it a build time requirement? I really don't care about how to do it..this would be up to the volunteer. But the license issue must be discussed since you are not allowed to import non-ZPL code to svn.zope.org. Well, if we simply suck sqlite in as a build time requirement (during the 'make' process) do we care about importing non-ZPL code into svn.zope.org? We would only care about licensing when distributing binaries that include sqlite, no? - Rocky -- Rocky Burt ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com ServerZen Hosting -- http://www.serverzenhosting.net News About The Server -- http://www.serverzen.net ___ 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
sqlite is public domain code, FWIW. I doubt this is incompatible with the ZPL. It would just require an acknowledgement from ZC that it's safe to be included in a Zope distro. - C On Dec 22, 2005, at 11:14 AM, Rocky Burt wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: --On 22. Dezember 2005 11:42:30 -0330 Rocky Burt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When you mentioned before about importing sqlite into svn.zope.org, you were talking about actually including a snapshot of sqlite inside zope source rather than making it a build time requirement? I really don't care about how to do it..this would be up to the volunteer. But the license issue must be discussed since you are not allowed to import non-ZPL code to svn.zope.org. Well, if we simply suck sqlite in as a build time requirement (during the 'make' process) do we care about importing non-ZPL code into svn.zope.org? We would only care about licensing when distributing binaries that include sqlite, no? - Rocky -- Rocky Burt ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com ServerZen Hosting -- http://www.serverzenhosting.net News About The Server -- http://www.serverzen.net ___ 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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] I'll note, FWIW, that we don't do installs from Zope 3 checkouts. Yes, this is understood. I think it's worth asking whether this is an important requirement. Perhaps more generally, how important is it that the repository reflects the released version of the software, and how close can we get? It was not a goal for Zope 3. I have often wondered if it should be. First we'd need to agree on at least the principle that a checkout is ideally equivalent to a kind of 'sumo release' of Zope that includes everything, and builds as such, and acts like such a release. Right. I don't have an opinion. I'd be interested to hear from others. I realize that reaching such a point practically may be hard, Maybe, don't know. I'll note that, at lease for Zope 3, I'd like to put a lot of this on the table. I'd like to revisit how we package and collect things, both for releases and for checkouts. just wondering if we can at least get some agreement on the ideal situation. That would be a good starting point. If it is, then we should make it work. Question is, is it worth delaying the release? I don't know. It's not worth delaying the release, if at least in the release the dance continues to work, which I understand it does (and certainly did for the beta). I do think it's important though, but nothing is worth delaying the release and I expect fixing this would shake up things. Are other OK with this approach? If we did stay with the current situation, we'd need to cleanup the documentation so that a developer can easily reminder herself what she can do and how to do it. Yes, an obscure error is not very helpful, and I already know of several people who ran into it independently. Including me. I even submitted a collector issue. :) Now there's this thread that people can find, but that won't be the case in the future... It'd be best the error message was a bit more clear, if at all possible, though I can imagine reaching that would also be hard. People won't be looking into the docs very quickly when they run into an obscure error, as this works with a release and you'd expect it to work with a checkout too -- this is an expectation people get from other projects. My suggestion is to have different README and INSTALL files for the checkout that tell people what they can do and how to do it and to change the install target to simply tell people that install isn't currently supported in a checkout and to read the appropriate text files. 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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: I'll note that, as a developer, I have never done this and probably never would want to do this. How do you test 'mkzopeinstance' then? Build a release first? That's rather cumbersome. Anyway, small point. In Zope3, I use bin/mkzopeinstance. In Zope 2 I have always (since the advent of the configure/make dance) use make instance to make my checkout into an instance. I'm told that in the current world, you can also use utilities/mkzopeinstance. The only use case for this is a deployer of Zope that wants to install an unreleased revision of Zope. If this use case is driving this, a better solution might be to build automatic snapshot releases. I want to be able to work in zope instances, no matter what version of zope, released or unreleased, I'm dealing with. I don't see how I should do this right now. See above. 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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
Martijn Faassen wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: Who has the knowledge and time to fix this? I think we need to have some philosophical agreement on what is going to be done before we figure out who has time to fix this. I think the issue is a bit deeper than just a bug people want fix, even though it presents itself that way. The requirements that zpkg tries to fulfill, primarily multiple distributions from the same repository, have given us this situation. No, a lack of time and agreement on goals have given us this situation. If we'd had more time for this release, or for that matter, if people had eleveted this issue sooner (better?) we could have solved it with zpkg. Perhaps we should revisit zpkg and add the requirement that the state of the repository should be as similar as possible to that of at least *one* of those distributions, and see what happens to its design. If we agree on that goal, then I'm sure we can fix it if we wish. Fixing this should be part of the Zope 2.10 cycle, hopefully. Yup. I can interpret your question another way, as a count against zpkg: zpkg is so peculiar to Zope that even most Zope core developers don't know how to fix this. That sucks and in my book is a very serious negative point against zpkg. That would count as a serious negative point for any new technology. The simplicity of repository *is* distribution has a very important benefit in its favor there, as that's trivial to understand. And would have made including Zope 3 in Zope 2 a real mess. 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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
Andreas Jung wrote: ... I am not against zpkg but I have really no idea how it works, what is does for me and how it causes the particular trouble in this case..at the moment zpkg is just a magic black box with some esoteric functionalityto make it short: I need to learn what zpkg is and how it works. Until then ppl with some zpkg skills need to care about the problem. zpkg has reasonable extensive documentation. I'll note that zpkg is providing us 2 benefits: - Making the release possible by excluding bits of Zope 3 that are not ready for release. - Allowing us to avoid one monster setup.py file in the root of Zope that has to be changed any time we add or remove an extension module. The later is a significant benefit. Unfortunately though, it is a mixed benefit. We are bending zpkg to do something it wasn't intended to do. Originally, it was designed just to make releases. It hasn't really been adequately rethought to support checkouts. As a result we've had to make some compromises. 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] Re: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Rocky Burt wrote: Well, if we simply suck sqlite in as a build time requirement (during the 'make' process) do we care about importing non-ZPL code into svn.zope.org? We would only care about licensing when distributing binaries that include sqlite, no? will this imply that I need to have an internet connection to make/install zope3 from checkouts? /dario -- -- --- Dario Lopez-Kästen, IT Systems Services Chalmers University of Tech. Lyrics applied to programming application design: emancipate yourself from mental slavery - redemption song, b. marley ___ 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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
--On 22. Dezember 2005 12:44:23 -0330 Rocky Burt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, if we simply suck sqlite in as a build time requirement (during the 'make' process) do we care about importing non-ZPL code into svn.zope.org? We would only care about licensing when distributing binaries that include sqlite, no? The sources must be part of the distribution so loading the package is not an option for me. But as Chris pointed out Sqlite is really free software. Since you volunteered (didn't you? :-) ) one should ask Jim about the license issue . Then the source should go at some location on svn.zope.org. The same applies to the SqliteDA (it's ZPL..maybe one should contact the author as well)that's should not be too hard. So I am +0.75 to include Sqlite with Zope 2.10 (already deprecating Gadfly in 2.9 (I created already a copy of the ZGadyfly product on svn.zope.org). -aj pgpktnFtMjN75.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 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: 2433 Blamelist: efge 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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
Paul Winkler wrote: On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 08:37:22AM +0100, Dario Lopez-K?sten wrote: +1 on this. It is important for us in the forced to be both developer and deployer by evil sysadmins camp. I'm one of those guys too. I'm sure I can learn to live with the 2.9 release layout but right now it's just confusing. I think one reason people are just now starting to complain is that we had no idea this change was coming. Checkouts don't look any different, so it was a bit of a surprise to see such a big change in the tarball. I'm sure this was discussed in some thread somewhere but it evidently didn't register for me. The tar ball looks the same (wrt configure/make/make install). It's the checkout that has changed. 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] zope-2.9 r40780 make install doesn't finish, files missing from bin
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 01:51:40PM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: The tar ball looks the same (wrt configure/make/make install). It's the checkout that has changed. Ah, sorry, I was talking about directory layout, and that's a different question (and not really a big deal). Didn't mean to go off on a tangent. As you were -- 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] 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: 2434 Blamelist: andreasjung 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] Re: Directory structure on svn.zope.org
Andreas Jung wrote: The top-level directory structure on svn.zope.org appears a bit messy to me. There we have the folders for the large projects CMF, Zope, Zope3 and lots modules that possibly don't belong there. Wouldn't it make sense to move them into a dedicated Zope3-modules folder (or choose another name)? +1 on this... i would say a dedicated zope3-modules folder and a dedicated zope2-modules folder (well, i don't care what the names are either, but some toplevel containing folders). - Rocky -- Rocky Burt ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com ServerZen Hosting -- http://www.serverzenhosting.net News About The Server -- http://www.serverzen.net ___ 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: Directory structure on svn.zope.org
On Thursday 22 December 2005 14:26, Rocky Burt wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: The top-level directory structure on svn.zope.org appears a bit messy to me. There we have the folders for the large projects CMF, Zope, Zope3 and lots modules that possibly don't belong there. Wouldn't it make sense to move them into a dedicated Zope3-modules folder (or choose another name)? +1 on this... i would say a dedicated zope3-modules folder and a dedicated zope2-modules folder (well, i don't care what the names are either, but some toplevel containing folders). -1. We had this before and decided against it. Please discuss such important issues that concern Zope 3 on zope3-dev. 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ deprecated ZGadfly/Gadfly
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Jung wrote:
Log message for revision 40981:
deprecated ZGadfly/Gadfly
Changed:
U Zope/trunk/doc/CHANGES.txt
U Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/ZGadflyDA/__init__.py
-=-
Modified: Zope/trunk/doc/CHANGES.txt
===
--- Zope/trunk/doc/CHANGES.txt2005-12-22 11:32:11 UTC (rev 40980)
+++ Zope/trunk/doc/CHANGES.txt2005-12-22 11:37:44 UTC (rev 40981)
@@ -28,6 +28,8 @@
- ZClasses are deprecated and should no longer be used.
+ - ZGadyFlyDA/Gadfly is deprecated
+
- Added a clock server servertype which allows users to
configure methods that should be called periodically as if
they were being called by a remote user agent on one of Zope's
Modified: Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/ZGadflyDA/__init__.py
===
--- Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/ZGadflyDA/__init__.py 2005-12-22
11:32:11 UTC (rev 40980)
+++ Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/ZGadflyDA/__init__.py 2005-12-22
11:37:44 UTC (rev 40981)
@@ -15,6 +15,12 @@
$Id$
+import warnings
+warnings.warn('Using Gadfly and ZGadflyDA is deprecated. The module will be '
+ 'removed in Zope 2.11)',
+ DeprecationWarning,
+ stacklevel=2)
+
import Globals, os
classes=('DA.Connection',)
Deprecation warnings at package scopy of a product aren't helpful,
because they fire *every time Zope starts*, whether the person *uses*
the deprecated pacakge or not. Let's find a way to trigger the warning
from *third-party code*, but not from Zope code itself (I note that the
ZClass warning spews every time, as well).
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
iD8DBQFDqwT4+gerLs4ltQ4RAtrlAJ9qcT6Qhl5JR3lJRlwtxbxSA5iVGQCcCIXq
edjqSCeMePJxdJFZVdPldTw=
=hWk4
-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] [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Dario Lopez-Kästen wrote: Chris Withers wrote: 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 ;-) I use it a lot, and like Chris, for the DateTime stuff, but also for looking up how to manage properties, etc. It is/was a big help for me (more so than the zope book, at least when I was learning Zope) when learning stuff and looking up things. One difference I perceive (YMMV) between the Zope book and the Online help is that the online help is more of a renference than the Zope book. I think my point is that it is an added value if there is an online help available that does not require a live connection to the internet every time you need to look something up. So +1 on killing the current helpsystem and +1 on replacing it with something nicer :-) The online help reference for ZPT is quite good (and DTML as well), and before I knew ZPT well I used it a lot. I still look there occasionally for minor API things (like property managers and DateTime), though obviously this is also at various web-based sources. DocFinderTab is generally superior, save for those objects and technologies that are not persistent objects, or are not described well by the API (ZPT and DateTime, for instance.) Also, I too use Gadfly frequently in training (and also when I was learning Zope), and it's fantastic that it's already there and usable. Installing MySQL or Postgres and an adapter is absurdly complicated with multiple people with multiple operating systems. I suppose a simple downloadable Product would be okay, but what burdens is that easing? --jcc -- Building Websites with Plone http://plonebook.packtpub.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
Dario Lopez-Kästen wrote: Chris Withers wrote: 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 ;-) I use it a lot, and like Chris, for the DateTime stuff, but also for looking up how to manage properties, etc. It is/was a big help for me (more so than the zope book, at least when I was learning Zope) when learning stuff and looking up things. One difference I perceive (YMMV) between the Zope book and the Online help is that the online help is more of a renference than the Zope book. I think my point is that it is an added value if there is an online help available that does not require a live connection to the internet every time you need to look something up. So +1 on killing the current helpsystem and +1 on replacing it with something nicer :-) The online help reference for ZPT is quite good (and DTML as well), and before I knew ZPT well I used it a lot. I still look there occasionally for minor API things (like property managers and DateTime), though obviously this is also at various web-based sources. DocFinderTab is generally superior, save for those objects and technologies that are not persistent objects, or are not described well by the API (ZPT and DateTime, for instance.) Also, I too use Gadfly frequently in training (and also when I was learning Zope), and it's fantastic that it's already there and usable. Installing MySQL or Postgres and an adapter is absurdly complicated with multiple people with multiple operating systems. I suppose a simple downloadable Product would be okay, but what burdens is that easing? --jcc -- Building Websites with Plone http://plonebook.packtpub.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: [RfC] Removal of old stuff in Zope 2.10
Rocky Burt schrieb: Andreas Jung wrote: --On 22. Dezember 2005 15:20:27 +0100 robert rottermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I perfectly agree with both of these arguments. However having a dead easy to use RDBMS tool is very convenient. Both for teaching and marketing purposes. I agree (meanwhile) but we have to sort out the issues I mentioned already (license, integration with Z 3, who volunteers :-)) Hmm... I'm definitely willing to help out here. But one strike against me is my lack of zope3 development knowledge. When you mentioned before about importing sqlite into svn.zope.org, you were talking about actually including a snapshot of sqlite inside zope source rather than making it a build time requirement? I'd still rather not include depencies on other projects into the core. Even more if they are problematic license. And last not least - I'd not like zope bringing its own sqlite libs where I might have some in my python install already. I'm definitively -1 on including it in the core, no matter how usefull it migh appear. +1 in the list of suggested 3rd party products with easy install ___ 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
Tim Peters wrote: I'm sure Paul meant that the content of the tarball _looks_ very different now. Change is always disconcerting. I vividly recall that when ZODB switched to zpkgtools-based releases, we had messages from people staring at the tarball wondering where the ZODB code was -- [snip] I think it'd be nice to have the code in a more obvious place in the tarball. The current layout makes it a lot harder to inspect a release's source code without installing. I realize that after installation it looks like Python packages again, but perhaps it's a difference we can minimize somehow, as it is an place Zope stuff looks 'special' to the world, and not in our core business, which is web application framework stuff. Regards, Martijn ___ 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
Jim Fulton wrote: My suggestion is to have different README and INSTALL files for the checkout that tell people what they can do and how to do it and to change the install target to simply tell people that install isn't currently supported in a checkout and to read the appropriate text files. Sounds like a reasonable idea. The bit of the install target pointing this out is essential, otherwise people will have no clue that the README and INSTALL are *different* in the checkout. On the longer term I hope we can work towards making them less different again. Regards, Martijn ___ 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] What use cases are driving make install from a checkout?
Jim Fulton wrote: I'd like to step back and see if we can agree on what is driving the desire for make install. I'll note that one reason is that it worked this way before, but I don't think that that is a good enough reason to delay the release. I'll note one use case: - A Zope deployer wants to deploy an unreleased version of Zope because they need some feature or bug fix that hasn't been released yet. Can anyone think of other use cases? * A Zope developer wants to test multiple Zope setups with the same checkout. The most important bit to me is not actually a use case per se. It's don't surprise. Having the checkout be different from a release tarball will make it harder for people used to working with the release tarball to switch to working with the checkout (and vice versa, but that's less common). This makes it harder for people to dive into core development on occasion. We want to make it easy for people, not harder. It's not a big barrier, but it is a barrier. I mostly work with release tarballs while developing, but sometimes I need to work with a checkout. In that case I want to suddenly have to switch to a different way of doing things. A bit that's related to this, and also not exactly a use case, is don't be special. Being different in the way checkouts versus releases work is not Zope's core business of being a web application platform. It's another doubletake for people who just want to try things out, and may stop some people from getting there; we should lower the amount of persistence needed to get into Zope by random python developers as much as possible. :) This possibly ties into a larger discussion on the way we layout our zope source repository -- people who are just interested in zope.interface and want to help develop it, say, have a barrier right now that could be avoided. Of course the ability to hand out release tarballs with zope.interface is even more important and we do have that, so that's great. We should probably be holding this discussion later, not right now, though. Regards, Martijn ___ 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] What use cases are driving make install from a checkout?
Martijn Faassen wrote: We should probably be holding this discussion later, not right now, though. Please. :) 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 )
