Re: [Zope3-dev] Putting pullparser and clientform where they belong (reverting 39890)
Martijn Faassen wrote: Hey, Jim Fulton wrote: [snip] I'm guessing that this is an issue because you install Zope's into site-packages and you don't want a Zope installed package to clobber a package that is separately packaged. Is that right? The normal way to install Zope is in it's own directory. In this case, a package supplied with Zope only affects Zope. In which case, I don't see the need to rip it out. While it's true that this is normal for you and me, I think the cause of zope is just a library is much helped if we *also* consider it normal for Zope to be installed into site-packages. I'm not convinced that Zope is just a library. Certainly, the zope package is just a library, but I don't think that the app server is. So, I just want to point out that your statement of what is normal doesn't imply that we consider installation with `configure` without '--prefix' as *abnormal* and that this is something we should support. Jim tries to figure out this triple negative ... :) On Linux, configure with without --prefix does *not* install Zope into site-packages. It creates a top-level directory for Zope in /usr/local. Furthermore, we do install Zope into site-packages on Windows and this (convenient for us) decision hasn't exactly been popular. So, I reiterate that we should distinguish between releases of Zope packages and releases of the application server. I'm pretty convinced that the app server is *not* a library and shouldn't be treated as such. 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 ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Putting pullparser and clientform where they belong (reverting 39890)
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: While it's true that this is normal for you and me, I think the cause of zope is just a library is much helped if we *also* consider it normal for Zope to be installed into site-packages. I'm not convinced that Zope is just a library. Certainly, the zope package is just a library, but I don't think that the app server is. So, I just want to point out that your statement of what is normal doesn't imply that we consider installation with `configure` without '--prefix' as *abnormal* and that this is something we should support. Jim tries to figure out this triple negative ... :) Sorry. :) On Linux, configure with without --prefix does *not* install Zope into site-packages. It creates a top-level directory for Zope in /usr/local. Okay, point taken. Furthermore, we do install Zope into site-packages on Windows and this (convenient for us) decision hasn't exactly been popular. So, I reiterate that we should distinguish between releases of Zope packages and releases of the application server. I'm pretty convinced that the app server is *not* a library and shouldn't be treated as such. But the app server does use parts of Zope 3 that *are* libraries, so perhaps we should start thinking about splitting things up somehow? Regards, Martijn ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: Putting pullparser and clientform where they belong (reverting 39890)
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 10:10:52AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| Martijn Faassen wrote:
| Jim Fulton wrote:
[...]
| I'm guessing that this is an issue because you install
| Zope's into site-packages and you don't want a Zope installed
| package to clobber a package that is separately packaged. Is that right?
|
| The normal way to install Zope is in it's own directory. In this case,
| a package supplied with Zope only affects Zope. In which case, I don't
| see the need to rip it out.
|
| While it's true that this is normal for you and me, I think the cause of
| zope is just a library is much helped if we *also* consider it normal
| for Zope to be installed into site-packages.
|
| I'm not convinced that Zope is just a library. Certainly,
| the zope package is just a library, but I don't think that
| the app server is.
[...]
| So, I reiterate that we should distinguish between releases of Zope
| packages and releases of the application server. I'm pretty convinced
| that the app server is *not* a library and shouldn't be treated as such.
Hmm. What about this notion: the app server is a library, and the
zope instance is the application. The zope instance is not installed
in site-packages, it is in /srv. This seems to make some sense to me,
and also happens to be how the current (3.1.0) zope3 package is in
debian.
However, that would make it difficult to have more than one version of
zope installed concurrently (for the same version of python). Then
again, for a production system this wouldn't be an issue because the
version of zope won't be changing. If new versions are backwards
compatible then normally upgrading the one-and-only zope version
wouldn't be a problem for users, particularly if the add-on packages
are also provided by the distribution.
Just some thoughts for consideration.
-D
--
\begin{humor}
Disclaimer:
If I receive a message from you, you are agreeing that:
1. I am by definition, the intended recipient
2. All information in the email is mine to do with as I see fit and make
such financial profit, political mileage, or good joke as it lends
itself to. In particular, I may quote it on USENET or the WWW.
3. I may take the contents as representing the views of your company.
4. This overrides any disclaimer or statement of confidentiality that may
be included on your message
\end{humor}
www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Putting pullparser and clientform where they belong (reverting 39890)
Martijn Faassen wrote: ... But the app server does use parts of Zope 3 that *are* libraries, so perhaps we should start thinking about splitting things up somehow? Yes, somehow. :) (I wish I had time to master eggs ) 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 ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Putting pullparser and clientform where they belong (reverting 39890)
Derrick Hudson wrote: On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 10:10:52AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | Martijn Faassen wrote: | Jim Fulton wrote: [...] | I'm guessing that this is an issue because you install | Zope's into site-packages and you don't want a Zope installed | package to clobber a package that is separately packaged. Is that right? | | The normal way to install Zope is in it's own directory. In this case, | a package supplied with Zope only affects Zope. In which case, I don't | see the need to rip it out. | | While it's true that this is normal for you and me, I think the cause of | zope is just a library is much helped if we *also* consider it normal | for Zope to be installed into site-packages. | | I'm not convinced that Zope is just a library. Certainly, | the zope package is just a library, but I don't think that | the app server is. [...] | So, I reiterate that we should distinguish between releases of Zope | packages and releases of the application server. I'm pretty convinced | that the app server is *not* a library and shouldn't be treated as such. Hmm. What about this notion: the app server is a library, and the zope instance is the application. That's what we are discussing. I think experience has shown that the app server should not be treated as just a library. BTW, wrt versions, it seems to be a common practice to treat different versions as separate packages. For example, on my Ubuntu system, Berkeley DB 4.2 and 4.3 are treated as separate (sets of) packages. I'll also note that: - I don't think there is a single right answer. I wouldn't object to people making app server as library distributions as long as there can also be app server as application distributions. - I think we need to reevaluate all of this, in light of things like Eggs and maybe Paste Deploy, in the next release cycle, which will also be affected by the establishment of the Zope Foundation and projects within it. I'm hoping that there can be some useful high-bandwidth brainstorming on these topics at PyCon 2006. 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 ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] zopectl in linux-ha environment
| In zopectl: | [...] | if __name__ == '__main__': | run() | [...] | | What kind of return-statement/exception i have to use? You should add a 'sys.exit(exit-code)' somewhere. Where to add it is the question. -- Sidnei da Silva Enfold Systems, LLC. http://enfoldsystems.com ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Putting pullparser and clientform where they belong (reverting 39890)
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:27:18AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: BTW, wrt versions, it seems to be a common practice to treat different versions as separate packages. For example, on my Ubuntu system, Berkeley DB 4.2 and 4.3 are treated as separate (sets of) packages. Yes it is common, but the maintenance burden is higher. Also, if you can avoid it, why do you want two sets of packages that do the same thing? I am not fully convinced that zope 3 on the python path is workable, time will tell. -- Brian Sutherland Metropolis - it's the first movie with a robot. And she's a woman. And she's EVIL!! ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Putting pullparser and clientform where they belong (reverting 39890)
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 06:35:11PM +0100, Brian Sutherland wrote: On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 10:51:04AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: I am willing to consider a 3.2.1 release for this *after* the final. That would also be fine. OK, if you want to proceed with this, then we'll do that. Ok, I committed my patches to the trunk. And have back-ported them to the release branch in 41261. -- Brian Sutherland Metropolis - it's the first movie with a robot. And she's a woman. And she's EVIL!! ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
