[Zope-dev] New Release: zc.zservertracelog v1.2.0
Hi all, A new version of zc.zservertracelog has been released. This version mostly fixes bugs that were found in the tracereport analysis script. -- Alex Smith Software Engineer Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK version numbering and Zope 2.12
Hey, Martin Aspeli wrote: > - What is the current version of ZTK? 1.0? 1.0-something? 3.5? Note > that docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit talks about 3.5. 1.0. It's not released yet though. I've corrected some of that documentation. > - What is the canonical location of a ZTK KGS? I'm locking for a > buildout [versions] block in particular. As Hanno said, this is still in progress. I hope it gets merged to trunk soon so we can properly document it. Right now this is non-documented stuff you "just have to know", and that's against the philosophy of the steering group. > - What is the plan for Zope 2.12 final? Is it going to rely on some > release of the ZTK, or just its own mix of versions? I don't know. :) Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: Sandbox/nadako/zope.app.publisher/ Clean up dependencies.
Hanno Schlichting wrote: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: >> Stephan Richter wrote: >>> You can not require a minor version in setup.py. >> Huh? setuptools doesn't care about how many dots are in the dependency. > > What Stefan probably meant here was: You *shouldn't* require minor > versions in setup.py. That was the consensus reached the last time we > fought about version requirements in setup.py. It's official, documented ZTK steering group policy: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/steeringgroup/decisions.html Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.12: mkzopeinstance, runzope and zopectl - a small proposal
Hi Chris!
Chris Withers wrote:
> yuppie wrote:
>>> yuppie wrote:
Currently buildout is just used to set up the software.
>>> Wrong. The buildout I posted, which uses no fancy recipes, sets up an
>>> instance. The egg cache, as such, is "the software"...
>> You ripped my sentence out of context. We were talking about Zope 2.12.
>> And Zope 2.12 currently doesn't use buildout for setting up instances.
>
> Sure it does. I've published the recipe. There's no more needed than that...
Your recipe is not published as part of Zope 2.12. And it doesn't work
on Windows.
[...]
>> These
>> buildouts are more 'software' than 'instance'. Maybe with that scenario
>> my assertions make more sense to you?
>
> Nope. As I said, The "Zope 2.12" software will never be in such a
> buildout, just used by it. As such, the "egg cache" wherever and however
> you have it becomes the "Zope 2.12" software... Anything in the buildout
> is "software" that is local to that instance, like Products or External
> Methods used to be in days of old...
Are you ignoring the fact that buildouts with several dev eggs exist? Or
do you define all dev eggs as local to the instance?
For development I regularly use one dev buildout with several different
test instances. The dev eggs are local to my dev buildout, but not local
to the test instances.
>>> I meant I nicer way of passing in the location of zope.conf...
>> If you create the instance in the same step your solution doesn't look
>> that bad.
>
> I don't know what you mean by this...
You propose to create the entry point and the instance in the same step.
And you have these lines in your buildout.cfg:
initialization =
import sys
sys.argv[1:1] = ['-C','${buildout:directory}/etc/zope.conf']
Why are you not happy with that solution?
>> we can make it unnecessary to specify the interpreter.
> When runzope and zopectl are built by buildout, this is already the
> case... One python is used for both...
No. Currently you also need 'zopepy' (or 'py' in your case).
>>> They're all the same python...
>> Exactly. But if we always use the same Python, why do we have to specify
>> it in several places?
>
> Huh? You don't...
Your buildout.cfg creates an interpreter entry point 'py'. Your
zope.conf.in specifies "python $INSTANCE/bin/py".
But the zopectl entry point already contains all the information it
needs. runzope doesn't depend on 'py'. Why does zopectl have to look up
the interpreter path in zope.conf und use 'py'?
Cheers,
Yuppie
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Release schedule for Zope 2.12.0 final
On 10.07.09 16:01, Andreas Jung wrote: > Hi there, > > here is my plan for the final release of Zope 2.12.0 final: > > Beta 3: July 14th > RC 1: August 6th > Final: September 4th > Updated schedule: RC1 will be released next September 4th (since we had to release another beta 4 version meanwhile). Andreas <>___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 8 OK
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Sun Aug 30 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Mon Aug 31 12:00:00 2009 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests. Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Aug 30 20:44:19 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-August/012424.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Aug 30 20:46:19 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-August/012425.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Aug 30 20:48:19 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-August/012426.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Aug 30 20:50:19 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-August/012427.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.4.6 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Aug 30 20:52:19 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-August/012428.html Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Aug 30 20:54:19 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-August/012429.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Aug 30 20:56:19 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-August/012430.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux From: Zope Tests Date: Sun Aug 30 20:58:19 EDT 2009 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-August/012431.html ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] UnicodeDecodeError problems with Zope 2.12.0b4
Chris Withers wrote: > Annoyingly, this required even more evil, since sitecustomize.py is no > longer found anywhere sensible in Python 2.5, correction: it never was, but prior to Zope 2.12, the INSTANCE_HOME ended up on PYTHONPATH and so sitecustomize.py could be put there. Using the buildout approach for Zope 2.12, it not longer is on PYTHONPATH, so it doesn't get found... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.12: mkzopeinstance, runzope and zopectl - a small proposal
yuppie wrote: >> yuppie wrote: >>> Currently buildout is just used to set up the software. >> >> Wrong. The buildout I posted, which uses no fancy recipes, sets up an >> instance. The egg cache, as such, is "the software"... > > You ripped my sentence out of context. We were talking about Zope 2.12. > And Zope 2.12 currently doesn't use buildout for setting up instances. Sure it does. I've published the recipe. There's no more needed than that... >>> And sometimes it is useful to link an existing instance to a new >>> buildout by updating some paths in instance/bin. >> >> I don't understand this. Please explain more... Still waiting for you to explain this more... >>> Or to create several instances based on one buildout. >> >> Why? > > I guess the scenario you have in mind is a lightweight buildout that > just contains some .cfg files describing the instance. Indeed, or any software that's local to that instance and isn't distributed as an egg. > There is nothing > wrong about using buildout that way, but maybe it's wrong to make it the > only supported way. Why? It should be fairly trivial to make mkzopeinstance a script that unpacks bootstrap.py and constructs the skeleton directories, zope.conf and buildout.cfg. I really don't see what more is needed than that? > The scenario I have in mind is a buildout that contains several > development eggs. In that case it is expensive to update and rebuild a > buildout. No it isn't. > And you might have local changes in that buildout. What does that have to do with anything? > These > buildouts are more 'software' than 'instance'. Maybe with that scenario > my assertions make more sense to you? Nope. As I said, The "Zope 2.12" software will never be in such a buildout, just used by it. As such, the "egg cache" wherever and however you have it becomes the "Zope 2.12" software... Anything in the buildout is "software" that is local to that instance, like Products or External Methods used to be in days of old... >> I meant I nicer way of passing in the location of zope.conf... > > If you create the instance in the same step your solution doesn't look > that bad. I don't know what you mean by this... > we can make it unnecessary to specify the interpreter. When runzope and zopectl are built by buildout, this is already the case... One python is used for both... >>> No. Currently you also need 'zopepy' (or 'py' in your case). >> >> They're all the same python... > > Exactly. But if we always use the same Python, why do we have to specify > it in several places? Huh? You don't... > 4.) How do you create zopeservice.py for Windows? What's Windows? Seriously though, I haven't needed to run Zope 2.12 on Windows, so I don't know... >>> But we have to support Windows. And I was able to get zopeservice.py >>> running with mkzopeinstance. *If* we decide to use buildout the way >>> you propose, someone has to figure out how to create zopeservice.py >>> without mkzopeinstance. >> >> Sure, I can't imagine it's a particularly hard problem, it's just not >> one the I'm interested in solving... > > That makes two of us. If nobody wants to do the work, your proposal is > moot. *sigh* By all means, please do go ahead and make more work for yourself ;-) Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
