Re: [Zope-dev] standard_html_header standard_html_footer in Zope 2.12

2009-10-16 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Baiju M mba...@zeomega.com wrote:
 On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote:
 On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Baiju M mba...@zeomega.com wrote:
    Is standard_html_header  standard_html_footer
 removed in Zope 2.12 ?

 It looks like we need to cleanup some more code, from Zope 2.12 branch:

 $ find src/ -name *.py|xargs grep standard_html_header|wc -l
 25

 I think many of them has standard_html_header defined locally,
 but few of them should be cleaned up.

Please go forward and clean them up. Your help is much appreciated :)

Hanno
___
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

2009-10-16 Thread Zope Tests Summarizer
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Thu Oct 15 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Fri Oct 16 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: Thu Oct 15 20:45:57 EDT 2009
URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012792.html

Subject: OK : Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Oct 15 20:47:57 EDT 2009
URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012793.html

Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Oct 15 20:49:57 EDT 2009
URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012794.html

Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Oct 15 20:51:58 EDT 2009
URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012795.html

Subject: OK : Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.2 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Oct 15 20:53:58 EDT 2009
URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012796.html

Subject: OK : Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Oct 15 20:55:58 EDT 2009
URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012797.html

Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.2 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Oct 15 20:57:58 EDT 2009
URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012798.html

Subject: OK : Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.2 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Oct 15 20:59:58 EDT 2009
URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2009-October/012799.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] Zope closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Izak Burger
Hi again,

Izak Burger wrote:
 I eventually distilled the check varnish uses into a small C program, 
 and an interesting problem shows up. When you call shutdown(fd, SHUT_WR) 
 on your socket connection, in effect telling zope that you're done 
 talking to it, it looks like zope responds in kind by not talking to you 
 either. I deduce this from the fact that poll() returns POLLHUP in 
 revents and read() returns zero (EOF). POLLHUP, if I understand this 
 correctly, means the other side (zope) has hung up.

It seems this might not be a bug in zope. I'd like to describe what I've 
found this morning and where this is most possibly going wrong. Please 
tell me if I'm mistaken about something.

This goes all the way to what happens when you call poll() on a file 
descriptor. If you ask to be notified for POLLIN events only, it does 
not necessarily guarantee that POLLIN (or a timeout) are the only events 
that can cause poll() to return. The man page does not properly document 
this, but the header file does:

/* Event types always implicitly polled for.  These bits need not be set
in `events', but they will appear in `revents' to indicate the status
   of the file descriptor.  */
#define POLLERR 0x008   /* Error condition.  */
#define POLLHUP 0x010   /* Hung up.  */
#define POLLNVAL0x020   /* Invalid polling request.  */

In other words, a POLLHUP event can cause your poll() call to return 
even though the POLLIN event you were looking for didn't occur.

If we inspect Modules/socketmodule.c in the python (2.4.4) source code 
we see that it is assumed that if poll() returns a value greater than 
zero, it means data is available for reading.

If the client calls shutdown(SHUT_WR), this will cause a POLLHUP, which 
fools python into thinking there is data to be read. When it attempts to 
read that data, it ends up with nothing, that is, recv() returns 0.

Moving on to asyncore.py, we see this:

 data = self.socket.recv(buffer_size)
 if not data:
 # a closed connection is indicated by signaling
 # a read condition, and having recv() return 0.
 self.handle_close()
 return ''

And handle_close eventually ends up telling zope to close the connection.

This has two possible fixes, but both are probably required. Firstly, it 
seems the latest python still has this problem, so I probably need to 
report it as a bug. Secondly, since zope still requires older python 
versions to run, a workaround probably needs to be found. I suppose just 
rebuilding the _socket native module will probably do it and I will test 
this as soon as I have more time.

regards,
Izak
___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Lennart Regebro
2009/10/16 Izak Burger i...@upfrontsystems.co.za:
 Secondly, since zope still requires older python
 versions to run

Zope 2.12 run on Python 2.6. 2.6.4a1 is coming out the weeken, so if
this is a Python bug and we want it in 2.6.4 we need to get it in
before a b1, which also probably will be quite soon.

Some sort of monkey-patch or so would of course be welcome for earlier
Zopes too, so we can use this with Plone 3.

-- 
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Izak Burger wrote:
 Hi again,
 
 Izak Burger wrote:
 I eventually distilled the check varnish uses into a small C program, 
 and an interesting problem shows up. When you call shutdown(fd, SHUT_WR) 
 on your socket connection, in effect telling zope that you're done 
 talking to it, it looks like zope responds in kind by not talking to you 
 either. I deduce this from the fact that poll() returns POLLHUP in 
 revents and read() returns zero (EOF). POLLHUP, if I understand this 
 correctly, means the other side (zope) has hung up.
 
 It seems this might not be a bug in zope. I'd like to describe what I've 
 found this morning and where this is most possibly going wrong. Please 
 tell me if I'm mistaken about something.
 
 This goes all the way to what happens when you call poll() on a file 
 descriptor. If you ask to be notified for POLLIN events only, it does 
 not necessarily guarantee that POLLIN (or a timeout) are the only events 
 that can cause poll() to return. The man page does not properly document 
 this, but the header file does:
 
 /* Event types always implicitly polled for.  These bits need not be set
 in `events', but they will appear in `revents' to indicate the status
of the file descriptor.  */
 #define POLLERR 0x008   /* Error condition.  */
 #define POLLHUP 0x010   /* Hung up.  */
 #define POLLNVAL0x020   /* Invalid polling request.  */
 
 In other words, a POLLHUP event can cause your poll() call to return 
 even though the POLLIN event you were looking for didn't occur.
 
 If we inspect Modules/socketmodule.c in the python (2.4.4) source code 
 we see that it is assumed that if poll() returns a value greater than 
 zero, it means data is available for reading.
 
 If the client calls shutdown(SHUT_WR), this will cause a POLLHUP, which 
 fools python into thinking there is data to be read. When it attempts to 
 read that data, it ends up with nothing, that is, recv() returns 0.
 
 Moving on to asyncore.py, we see this:
 
  data = self.socket.recv(buffer_size)
  if not data:
  # a closed connection is indicated by signaling
  # a read condition, and having recv() return 0.
  self.handle_close()
  return ''
 
 And handle_close eventually ends up telling zope to close the connection.
 
 This has two possible fixes, but both are probably required. Firstly, it 
 seems the latest python still has this problem, so I probably need to 
 report it as a bug. Secondly, since zope still requires older python 
 versions to run, a workaround probably needs to be found. I suppose just 
 rebuilding the _socket native module will probably do it and I will test 
 this as soon as I have more time.

You might also look at fixing varnish:  I don't know of any valid
reason for it to be using the half-open connection model to test that
an HTTP-based backend is up -- certainly no browser in the world does
that;  instead, modern browsers nearly always try to keep the connection
open for subsequent requests.


Tres.
- -- ~~
===
Tres Seaver  +1 540-429-0999  tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software   Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkrYhPIACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ5PpACg19JYJc7pTUiUMZV8IWnGi5Dv
tJMAnikqfgLsi4lZB1eerO01d/48w3SK
=5mP5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Leonardo Rochael Almeida
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 16:36, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 [...]
 You might also look at fixing varnish:  I don't know of any valid
 reason for it to be using the half-open connection model to test that
 an HTTP-based backend is up

Going out on a limb here, but I think Varnish might be trying to save
on file-descriptors. It could be a while before a backend-server
answers and Varnish could have a large number of fds open on any given
time while talking to both clients and servers.
___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote:
 On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 16:36, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 [...]
 You might also look at fixing varnish:  I don't know of any valid
 reason for it to be using the half-open connection model to test that
 an HTTP-based backend is up
 
 Going out on a limb here, but I think Varnish might be trying to save
 on file-descriptors. It could be a while before a backend-server
 answers and Varnish could have a large number of fds open on any given
 time while talking to both clients and servers.

Hmmm?  A TCP socket corrresponds to exactly one open file descriptor,
which has to stick around for the response data to come back on.
Half-closing it is just silly, and is only guaranteed to work where
both ends expect to handle this case.  Given HTTP's request-response
model, it makes very little sense at all for the client to preemptively
shutdown writes on the connection.


Tres.
- --
===
Tres Seaver  +1 540-429-0999  tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software   Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkrYiqsACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ5dSgCgnqousqxHj8mGUIAZN2P9JTrZ
AeMAn01dRMSOYtRm4usudDBN3IZ4m9ii
=avfS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Lennart Regebro
2009/10/16 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com:
 Hmmm?  A TCP socket corrresponds to exactly one open file descriptor,
 which has to stick around for the response data to come back on.
 Half-closing it is just silly, and is only guaranteed to work where
 both ends expect to handle this case.

Half-closing is the standard way of saying close when you will, so
it's normal TCP-behavior. How many HTTP-servers that handle that I
don't know, but I have to agree that it's probably the right thing to
do.

-- 
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Lennart Regebro wrote:
 2009/10/16 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com:
 Hmmm?  A TCP socket corrresponds to exactly one open file descriptor,
 which has to stick around for the response data to come back on.
 Half-closing it is just silly, and is only guaranteed to work where
 both ends expect to handle this case.
 
 Half-closing is the standard way of saying close when you will, so
 it's normal TCP-behavior. How many HTTP-servers that handle that I
 don't know, but I have to agree that it's probably the right thing to
 do.

Under HTTP, it doesn't make any sense:  there isn't any mixed flow of
information going on at all;   everything is request-response driven.

Given that varnish has as its primary mission to be an HTTP accelerator,
and that the behavior is unexpected (in ten+ years of web programming,
I've *never* seen this behavior before), I would say that varnish should
make the half-close either go away (since it provides no benefit) or
at least configurable (since it breaks talking to servers which don't
expect the HUP).


Tres.
- --
===
Tres Seaver  +1 540-429-0999  tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software   Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkrYlS0ACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ5xAQCgw/Ifz0asq2Df4gAtSZqIQ7Ha
zvgAn3qXgL3tT9ynJ48rN438FUWSsONl
=5YXq
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Izak Burger
Tres Seaver wrote:
 You might also look at fixing varnish:  I don't know of any valid
 reason for it to be using the half-open connection model to test that
 an HTTP-based backend is up -- certainly no browser in the world does
 that;  instead, modern browsers nearly always try to keep the connection
 open for subsequent requests.

I have already fixed varnish, I commented out the shutdown() call. It 
now works as expected.

I just had a discussion about this with a colleague and it appears 
unclear exactly where to blame this.

When a client half-closes its connection while the server was calling 
recv(), it makes absolute sense that recv() SHOULD return an empty 
buffer. There is nothing to return, and there won't ever be, the 
connection has been closed. Python is therefore not to blame, even if it 
doesn't specifically check all the possible revents returned by poll().

When asyncore receives an empty result from recv(), it does correctly 
assume that the connection was shut down. It doesn't seem wrong for 
asyncore to let the upper layers know about this. It would seem that 
asyncore is not to blame either.

When asyncore calls the close() method inside zope, it ends up shuting 
down the whole thing. Though I could argue that zope shouldn't be doing 
this, the idea of a half-open connection doesn't work all that well in 
python/asyncore anyway, so given the framework within which zope 
operates, zope isn't to blame either.

Given that no browser (that I know of) does this half-closing thing, I 
would argue that varnish should at the very least offer a shutdown 
option for probing, so as to appear more like a browser.

In addition, HTTP 1.1 usually leaves the connection open unless you ask 
for it to be closed, so it almost seems more common not to shutdown the 
one end.

It seems then that the only way to fix this is to either put zope 
behind apache or something else that can handle half-closing, or to 
fix varnish.

regards,
Izak
___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Izak Burger wrote:
 Tres Seaver wrote:
 You might also look at fixing varnish:  I don't know of any valid
 reason for it to be using the half-open connection model to test that
 an HTTP-based backend is up -- certainly no browser in the world does
 that;  instead, modern browsers nearly always try to keep the connection
 open for subsequent requests.
 
 I have already fixed varnish, I commented out the shutdown() call. It 
 now works as expected.
 
 I just had a discussion about this with a colleague and it appears 
 unclear exactly where to blame this.
 
 When a client half-closes its connection while the server was calling 
 recv(), it makes absolute sense that recv() SHOULD return an empty 
 buffer. There is nothing to return, and there won't ever be, the 
 connection has been closed. Python is therefore not to blame, even if it 
 doesn't specifically check all the possible revents returned by poll().
 
 When asyncore receives an empty result from recv(), it does correctly 
 assume that the connection was shut down. It doesn't seem wrong for 
 asyncore to let the upper layers know about this. It would seem that 
 asyncore is not to blame either.
 
 When asyncore calls the close() method inside zope, it ends up shuting 
 down the whole thing. Though I could argue that zope shouldn't be doing 
 this, the idea of a half-open connection doesn't work all that well in 
 python/asyncore anyway, so given the framework within which zope 
 operates, zope isn't to blame either.
 
 Given that no browser (that I know of) does this half-closing thing, I 
 would argue that varnish should at the very least offer a shutdown 
 option for probing, so as to appear more like a browser.
 
 In addition, HTTP 1.1 usually leaves the connection open unless you ask 
 for it to be closed, so it almost seems more common not to shutdown the 
 one end.
 
 It seems then that the only way to fix this is to either put zope 
 behind apache or something else that can handle half-closing, or to 
 fix varnish.

Spot on -- good analysis of the problem.



Tres.
- --
===
Tres Seaver  +1 540-429-0999  tsea...@palladion.com
Palladion Software   Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkrYoMoACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7X/QCfYFSSp1MOVuTryLynCvS3Khs9
AuMAn0bxsQ6zYdl82V4Ye5iFuFptL5tQ
=ka8O
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
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] Testrunner option for running tests in random order?!?

2009-10-16 Thread Sebastien Douche
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 14:33, Christian Theune c...@gocept.com wrote:

Hi Christian.

 That's what working branches are for.

Done :
http://svn.zope.org/zope.testing/branches/sdouche-shuffle/



-- 
Sebastien Douche sdou...@gmail.com
Twitter: http://bit.ly/afkrK (agile, python, open source)
___
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.site.hooks

2009-10-16 Thread Fabio Tranchitella
* 2009-10-14 17:33, Martijn Faassen wrote:
 That's more or less what I have in mind. The suggestions are just about 
 trying to make it prettier.
 ...
 [snip]

I applied your suggestions, and I think now the code is more robust; with
this branch, all the ZTK tests pass except zope.sendmail, which can be
easily fixed (it is importing PermissionPublic from zope.component.zcml,
which is a bad idea by itself).

 I think we need to try to separate security-related tests from the rest 
 of the tests, and test that they fail with the right errors if 
 zope.security is not present and do the right thing when it is.
 
 It would also be nice to be able to run the other tests with or without 
 zope.security - the result should be identical.

Did you check the ConditionalImports test layer in my zope.component
branch? It is already running the tests with and without zope.security.

I want to bring the test coverage for zope.component.zcml and
zope.component.security to 100% before asking to merge it back to the
trunk.

Any other suggestion?

Thanks,
Fabio
___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Izak Burger
Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote:
 Going out on a limb here, but I think Varnish might be trying to save
 on file-descriptors.

Interestingly, The Squid FAQ almost seems to imply that closing the 
write-side can cause more file-descriptors to be used. Squid can 
apparently not tell the difference between half-closed and full-closed 
connections, and it makes matter worse.

Though I do not know this for sure, some reading on the subject suggests 
that nginx also doesn't like half-closed connections.
___
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 closes connection if the client closes the write-end of connection

2009-10-16 Thread Lennart Regebro
From the HTTP/1.1 spec:

  Servers SHOULD NOT close a connection in the
  middle of transmitting a response, unless a network or client failure
  is suspected.

But on the other hand:

  When a client or server wishes to time-out it SHOULD issue a graceful
  close on the transport connection. Clients and servers SHOULD both
  constantly watch for the other side of the transport close, and
  respond to it as appropriate. If a client or server does not detect
  the other side's close promptly it could cause unnecessary resource
  drain on the network.

So HTTP seems to contradict itself, typically But from looking at
other peoples responses, most interpret the specification that the
connection should immediately be closed, so the Zope does the right
thing there, and Varnish should be changed. This is apparently the
generally accepted interpretation.

-- 
Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok
http://regebro.wordpress.com/
+33 661 58 14 64
___
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] getProxiedObject not imported in zope.locaton.location

2009-10-16 Thread Attila Oláh
Hi,

Here's a snippet from zope.location.location:

__doc__ = ClassAndInstanceDescr(
lambda inst: getProxiedObject(inst).__doc__,
lambda cls, __doc__ = __doc__: __doc__,
)

However, getProxiedObject is never imported in this file (version
3.5.0 from pypi). Is this a bug?

Bests,
Attila
___
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 )