[Zope-Annce] More TM ideas
Following up to my note from yesterday. ZEA *is* the official registrant (but not legitimate owner) of the Cirlce-Z-Zope (CZZ) mark in many countries in the Madrid Protocol. You can search the WIPO database for Zope and find it. Zope Corporation is the official registrant of the word Zope in many countries in the Madrid Protocol and our registration predates the ZEAs. Since the ZEA registration is based on the word Zope we believe that an official trademark opposition will be successful. We are also only willing to pay the fees that Zope Corporation would otherwise have had to pay to register the marks itself. This offer was made in writing last Friday. The subtle but important point is that ZEA seems to be willing to transfer the marks to the Zope Foundation not Zope Corporation. This seems to be the essence of the difference in our position. If this is inaccurate -- i.e., ZEA is willing to transfer the marks to ZC with no strings attached then we can chalk this up to some incredible communication issue and can certainly move forward! It seems that the prospect of Zope Corporation's unfair (and unprecedented) management of the marks is the real issue. So that our position and policy are clear: *** We will not use (nor allow our successors or assigns) to use the Zope trademarks in non-competitive ways. *** The challenge is to figure out how to get this in place. One idea might be to make the BoD of the Zope Foundation the arbiter of any revocation action ZC might take. This would be a contractual relationship between ZC (and its successors and assigns) and the ZF. If ZC felt that a given ZC-licensed use of the marks had become inappropriate we would move to revoke the trademark license. If the license holder was unsatisfied with the revocation they would appeal to the Zope Foundation which, on vote of a supermajority of the BoD could overrule ZC's revocation action. It is our heartfelt sense that Zope Corporation is more likely to defend (within guidelines and process) the marks than a volunteer-led Foundation. We have heard comments that suggest that the Foundation should not be in the business of enforcement. Enforcement is an active responsibility. Perhaps once (and while) ZF has full-time staff to pursue Foundation business (including TM matters) the Foundation would be the first stop for tm issues. It has been reported that ZEA's original registration of the marks was defensive and done in an effort to preclude registrations from being made by unfriendly parties. We find it simply surprising that the first mention of their registrations to us was 18 months (!) after the fact. ZEA does not represent the entire Zope community in Europe (nor do they claim to) and certainly don't represent the global Zope community. In fact, we should all recognize that the ZEA competes with non-ZEA companies on proposals. That's fine, expected and natural. However, any action on ZEA's part that was made on behalf of the community is inappropriate. ZC does not claim to represent the whole Zope Community either. We are asserting our ownership (and, we think) aggressive desire to manage the marks and brand in a vendor-neutral way. With respect to ZEA's ownership of the Plone trademark - I am told by two people that ZEA helped register the Plone mark as a service to the Plone Foundation and that it has been or is in the process of being transferred. Presuming this is true I stand corrected. Even this morning the WIPO database advertises ZEA as the registrant of record for the mark. Regards, Rob -- Rob Page V: 540 361 1710 Zope Corporation F: 703 995 0412 ___ Zope-Announce maillist - Zope-Announce@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce Zope-Announce for Announcements only - no discussions (Related lists - Users: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope Developers: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope-Coders] Zope tests: 8 OK
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Tue Jul 19 11:01:02 2005 UTC to Wed Jul 20 11:01:02 2005 UTC. There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Unit Tests. Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.1.3 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Jul 19 23:26:30 EDT 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-July/002631.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_6-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Jul 19 23:28:01 EDT 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-July/002632.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Jul 19 23:29:31 EDT 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-July/002633.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_7-branch Python-2.4.1 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Jul 19 23:31:01 EDT 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-July/002634.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Jul 19 23:32:31 EDT 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-July/002635.html Subject: OK : Zope-2_8-branch Python-2.4.1 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Jul 19 23:34:01 EDT 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-July/002636.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.3.5 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Jul 19 23:35:31 EDT 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-July/002637.html Subject: OK : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.1 : Linux From: Zope Unit Tests Date: Tue Jul 19 23:37:01 EDT 2005 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-July/002638.html ___ Zope-Coders mailing list Zope-Coders@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-coders
[Zope-dev] SQL null to None patch
Is there any chance of getting Dieter Maurer's one line patch into the next bug fix release? http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/556 It would be hugely helpful to us. Andrew ___ 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] Running unit tests, LOGging errors
Using Zope 2.8 when I run the unit tests (bin/zopectl test ...) from a checkout (make instance), I have none of the LOGged errors appearing in the ouput. However if instead I use make then mkzopeinstance with another directory, running the tests make the errors appear in the output. There are no other differences in my setup. Anyone know why and where this behaviour is triggered ? 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] SQL null to None patch
Andrew Veitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any chance of getting Dieter Maurer's one line patch into the next bug fix release? http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/556 It would be hugely helpful to us. It would need some kind of unit tests. 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] SQL null to None patch
I'm happy to do a unit test for the one line of code in the patch - but not for the other 2600+ lines of ZRDB code! A On 20 Jul 2005, at 16:26, Florent Guillaume wrote: It would need some kind of unit tests. Florent ___ 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] SQL null to None patch
--On 20. Juli 2005 16:41:01 +0100 Andrew Veitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to do a unit test for the one line of code in the patch - but not for the other 2600+ lines of ZRDB code! That's better than nothing :-) -aj pgpLHJuyJYBed.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] Listing a groups users via Python and portal_groups
Hi guys, Im trying to work on a function call using Python that will list the users of any specified group using the function portal_groups. Ive been able to successfully do this the opposite way by getting the users groups via portal_membership: portal.portal_membership.getAuthenticatedMember().getGroups() Which will return all groups this user is associated with. So Ive been testing using portal_groups with function calls similar to this: portal.portal_groups.getGroupById(staff).getUsers() Where staff is the name of the group. This almost does what I need, but not quite close enough because it lists all groups and all users. Any suggestions or help is greatly appreciated! Thanks, Mike Mike Takahashi Web Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] UCLA Office of Instructional Development mtakahashi (at) oid.ucla.edu 310.794.9371 ___ 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: SQL null to None patch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andreas Jung wrote: --On 20. Juli 2005 16:41:01 +0100 Andrew Veitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm happy to do a unit test for the one line of code in the patch - but not for the other 2600+ lines of ZRDB code! That's better than nothing :-) Yup. The first test for an old module is by far the hardest one to write. At least if it exists, then somebody else can create an additional test for the next one-liner more easily; at best, somebody might start writing the tests we all wish had been written in the first place (back before we had our current testing culture, of course). Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC3nts+gerLs4ltQ4RAvbyAKCGdXr4px27NRgfJbOy6x9Fi/mRRgCeMlly BY0Ih+KEj16sp2Ca1Stmyc0= =nXUH -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 )
[Zope] How to get the download window option for file widget field?
Dear All,
I have created one ARCHETYPE having few fields for
FileWidget, to
upload the file.
Problem::In the base view page i want to get the
download window
option(same like when u try to download a file) while
clicking on link
to download those file contents
*Code which I have given in archetype for
FILE**
FileField('reserveform',
searchable=1,
required=0,
schemata='DetailedInfo3',
widget=FileWidget(label='Reservation
Form'))
FileField('enquiry',
searchable=1,
required=0,
schemata='DetailedInfo5',
widget=FileWidget(label='Enquiry Form'))
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
___
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] XUF and Postgres
David Pratt wrote: for this feedback. I will be evaluating this option as well. There are differences in licensing that may be a factor in what I decide to use after some evaluation. BSD with XUF compared to MIT with SimpleUserFolder. Huh?! What exactly is the problems with the MIT license? It's prettymuch the simplest and least restrictive open source license out there, which is why I selected it. Did you actually read the license file? ;-) I try to learn from GPL-like sources as opposed to using them in my code. The MIT license has NOTHING to do with the GPL. Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] ZTUtils.Iterator value in ZPT
David Pratt wrote: div tal:define = tabindex python:Iterator(range(100)); div .. html form contents .. a field input tal:attributes=tabindex/next ... ... another field /div What are you actually trying to do here? Would the following work? div tal:define = tabindex python:range(1,101); div .. html form contents .. a field input tal:attributes=tabindex ... ... another field /div cheers, Chris - who has no idea what a ZTUtils.Iterator is supposed to do... -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] ZopeProfiler (python profiler) - strange results
You might get more help by asking this question on one of the python lists, I know the profiler output has confused the hell out of me on more than one occasion ;-) Chris Maciej Wisniowski wrote: Hi! I've just run ZopeProfiler few times to check which functions are slowest in my site and during analysis of the results I've found something that confuses me a bit. When I'm showing results using print_stats and ordered by time I get times: calls tottime percall cumtime percallfunction ...total_x...cumulative_x ... X:1026(__call__) for function X. This seemed good till I've used print_callees format which showed me that function X is calling function Y and Z and their execution times are: functions_time = Y_call_time + Z_call_time. As far as I understand it tottime is the time without subfunctions' call times and cumtime is with subfunctions' call times, so I supposed that: cumulative_x - functions_time = total_x but this is not true... in almost every case I've checked it is rather: total_x + functions_time cumulative_x Why? I don't think these are concurrent threads... but what makes this difference? It's possibly something trivial but... ;) -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] should stream iterator be used for ZODB-generated string file?
We have an application whereby multimegabyte strings, each generated from the contents of several thousands of small objects in ZODB, are downloaded from zope as a CSV files. A particular CSV file is typically downloaded once or twice a day at a maximum. The major issue is that it takes a long time for the download to start. Would it be possible to use a stream iterator (introduced in zope 2.7.1) or should we simply do chunks of REQUEST.write() ? What are the requirements for using chunked REQUEST.write - do some specific HTTP headers need to be set or does zope take care of it all? Any advice or specific pointers would be appreciated. I've googled all I could find about the stream iterators, serving blobs etc. but all the info seems to be focused on serving large filesystem-based data. I am not sure what parts of that info applies to an use case that involves reading data from ZODB, or if stream iterators make sense for the use case at all. I guess we could generate a temporary file and then serve that using a stream iterator. I understand some parts of the zope machinery could perhaps be released faster that way, but I wonder if the benefits are worth the extra step. Thanks! Petri ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Pre-amble: I post this as a principal in a decently-sized Zope-focused business in the UK. Our company is also partnering with ZEA for some work. I will try to correct some of Rob's factual errors, and set the record straight for some of the issues discussed here. I am not an official spokesperson of ZEA, though - so bear in mind that what I'm saying here reflects what *I* (and my company) think about the situation, and not what ZEA thinks. I know a bit about why the decision to register the trademarks in Europe was made, why the managing partners of ZEA authorised it, and what's going on on the other side of the fence. I am reasonably neutral, though - and care more about what happens to Zope the *community* than anything else. - Matt Hamilton, Netsight On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 01:07:25 +0200, Rob Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are sorely disappointed that ZEA is unwilling to transfer the marks quickly and quietly so that we can proceed swiftly toward the formation of the Zope Foundation. This is wrong. ZEA offered you to transfer the trademarks if you covered the expenses involved in the registration (including the salary of the trademark professionals involved in the registration process), no strings attached - but Zope Corporation declined, and was more interested in sending threatening letters about trademark abuse, even though ZEA is the rightful owner of these marks in Europe at the moment. They were more interested in having the matter resolved *their* way than to cover the actual costs involved in registering the trademarks from ZEA's side. We have offered to reimburse the registration fees paid by the ZEA to the WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) in order to facilitate the transfer. We have further offered to preserve their license to use the Zope mark in the conduct of their business as an association of Zope companies. Aidan McGuire of Blue Fountain (another UK zope company), Xavier Heymans (of ZEA) and myself had a conference call with Lois Snitkoff from ZC on the 12th of July in which we offered to transfer the trademark if ZC contribute to the fees of the registration and, in the unwillingness to transfer the trademark to the ZF, at least agree to some form of 'social contract' that states the uses and rights of the mark. After consulting with others within ZC Lois' reply stated: Just to let you know quickly, we will not be paying any of the costs incurred when you registered our trademark. I have checked with management and they reiterate what our position has been consistently. Which directly contradicts what is said above. In the three weeks since learning of ZEA's illegitimate registration of our marks we have tried diligently (but unsuccessfully) to get ZEA to unconditionally transfer the rights of the registration. The registrations were not illegitimate, the Zope trademark was not registered anywhere but in the US at this point, so it was done as a defensive move to make sure the trademark was in friendly hands. In Europe you have companies/trademarks like ZOPEN that could have been problematic for the registration and approval, so a decision was made early on to secure the trademark for the Zope *community*. The companies that constitute ZEA make up a large part of the professional Zope companies in Europe, and they have a lot to lose by the brand being insecure in Europe. And in what way does not accepting ZEA's offer, to transfer the trademark to you by covering the costs involved in the registration, constitute try diligently? ZEA's registration represents an abuse of registration and management of international trademarks and the misappropriation of a mark that is clearly the property of Zope Corporation. So why is Zope Foundation being used as a pawn in the corporate strategies of Zope Corporation? I find this unclear intent pretty disconcerting. We know that the establishment of a fair trademark license for the entire Zope community is an _essential_ component of the Zope Foundation. It is possible that we will come to a conclusion with the ZEA prior to the conclusion of a trademark dispute process. So why are you unwilling to put the Zope trademark under the ownership of Zope *Foundation*? Again, Zope Foundation is being used as a pawn in the company strategies of Zope Corporation. As an aside, the ZEA has also registered the Plone logo as a trademark. It is not our business, but came as a surprise to us, that the Plone Foundation is not the owner of the Plone trademark. Not true. ZEA's trademark experts helped Plone Foundation register the Plone trademark initially, and promptly transferred the ownership of the trademarks to the Plone Foundation, just as they are willing to do the same for Zope Foundation. Personally, I find it interesting that Zope Corporation insists on ownership of the trademark instead of putting it in the Foundation. The moment Zope Corporation goes bankrupt, any company can buy the
Re: [Zope] Zope Foundation Update
On 7/20/05, Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't this really strange? How can ZEA register any ZC trademark?! Well, you register trademarks per country, so that would be one way, I guess... ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] ZCTextIndex - Collector Item #505?
I have encountered an unusual situation which I believe may be related to collector item #505 (http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/505 - ZCTextUndex should not hold a reference to a lexicon). Prior to performing a ZCatalog update I cleared the catalog (using the clear catalog option under the Advanced tab of the ZMI); then, to clear out the Lexicon, I deleted the Lexicon and created a new Lexicon (id of both was 'Lexicon'). I then added about 805,000 records to the ZCatalog (which went smoothly) and tested catalog searches - all went well, including globbing searches, 'and', 'and not' searches. The previous Lexicon had 764,410 word entries. The current Lexicon has 0 word entries. The ZCatalog and ZCTextIndex appear to be working ok, so I am guessing that somehow the ZCTextIndex is using a 'hidden/old' version of the Lexicon (not the newly created version) - which is very strange, as the .fs file was packed prior to the update (so any old versions should have been deleted). This activity was all performed on a linux server running zope 2.6.1 Finally, the questions: 1) Can ZCTextIndex really be using the some other version of the Lexicon (which I can not access via the ZMI)? 2) Was Collector Item #505 ever fixed (I can not find a reference to issue #505 in any of the zope change logs)? Thanks, Jonathan ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
--On 20. Juli 2005 12:43:22 +0100 Matt Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ZEA's registration represents an abuse of registration and management of international trademarks and the misappropriation of a mark that is clearly the property of Zope Corporation. So why is Zope Foundation being used as a pawn in the corporate strategies of Zope Corporation? I find this unclear intent pretty disconcerting. Why did not ZEA came up with such arguments against the ZF *much earlier*? The ZF proposal is out since some weeks. There was meanwhile an IRC chat with Rob, a lengthy discussion on the mailing list and Rob spoke at Europython. I can not remember having heard any objections from ZEA against this proposal. I have not heard any public statements of Paul Everitt at Europython during the ZF presentation *against* the ZF. Speaking as independent developer - neither representing the interests of ZC nor of ZEA - I find these behind-the-curtain negotiations extremely counterproductive from the community point of view and definitely not in the sense of the Zope community. -aj pgp7d0NH2R7td.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] ZTUtils.Iterator value in ZPT
Hi Chris. Thanks for your reply. My understanding (which may be flawed) is that ZTUtils iterator provides values of a sequence as you iterate over them with a repeat statement. I believe what I am trying to do is sensible. I have looked at the api and can't seem to get the right magic using the methods provided. Tabindex for forms keeps track of tab position so when you use tab key it moves the cursor to next field tabindex in form . So if I have 5 input fields from top to bottom, I want to define an iterator object, and obtain the next number in the iterator when zpt does its thing to create the form so that I would have a tabindex starting at 1 and next field value would be 2, then 3 etc. A range by itself doesn't do the trick since it provides all values to the variable where I am looking only for a single number incremented to the next value. Regards, David On Wednesday, July 20, 2005, at 03:51 AM, Chris Withers wrote: David Pratt wrote: div tal:define = tabindex python:Iterator(range(100)); div .. html form contents .. a field input tal:attributes=tabindex/next ... ... another field /div What are you actually trying to do here? Would the following work? div tal:define = tabindex python:range(1,101); div .. html form contents .. a field input tal:attributes=tabindex ... ... another field /div cheers, Chris - who has no idea what a ZTUtils.Iterator is supposed to do... -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: ZTUtils.Iterator value in ZPT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Pratt wrote: Hi Chris. Thanks for your reply. My understanding (which may be flawed) is that ZTUtils iterator provides values of a sequence as you iterate over them with a repeat statement. I believe what I am trying to do is sensible. I have looked at the api and can't seem to get the right magic using the methods provided. Tabindex for forms keeps track of tab position so when you use tab key it moves the cursor to next field tabindex in form . So if I have 5 input fields from top to bottom, I want to define an iterator object, and obtain the next number in the iterator when zpt does its thing to create the form so that I would have a tabindex starting at 1 and next field value would be 2, then 3 etc. A range by itself doesn't do the trick since it provides all values to the variable where I am looking only for a single number incremented to the next value. - From $ZOPE/lib/python/ZTUtils/Iterator: __doc__='''Iterator class Unlike the builtin iterators of Python 2.2+, these classes are designed to maintain information about the state of an iteration. The Iterator() function accepts either a sequence or a Python iterator. The next() method fetches the next item, and returns true if it succeeds. $Id: Iterator.py,v 1.9.42.2 2003/11/04 19:27:43 evan Exp $''' Note that last sentence, which explains why you are seeing the '1' value everywere. 'tal:repeat' over a range should get you what you want; I don't think you *need* an iterator for your use case. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC3lB++gerLs4ltQ4RAuvSAJwPRCNefT9753fli0xOL7EEnRRHgwCggT/C M3ysckA7tZJZkZ0I10xgkLI= =jzat -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: emergency user account does not work
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 03:55:06PM -0500, Tim Suter wrote: | After logging out of the ZMI, I have tried to log in as the emergency | user by filling in the proper credentials. The page never loads. Could | there be a tick I am missing in the security settings for the root | folder/ZMI? OR is this something that has to be run via localhost from | the server on which Zope is installed? I believe you can restrict the host(s) the emergency user's credentials are valid from. This will only happen if you specify it, though, and you can always change the emergency user data (username, password, and host restrictions) by editing the 'access' file in the zope instance. -D -- If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 20. Juli 2005 12:43:22 +0100 Matt Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ZEA's registration represents an abuse of registration and management of international trademarks and the misappropriation of a mark that is clearly the property of Zope Corporation. So why is Zope Foundation being used as a pawn in the corporate strategies of Zope Corporation? I find this unclear intent pretty disconcerting. Why did not ZEA came up with such arguments against the ZF *much earlier*? Speaking for me, I felt asking this type of questions suspecting ZC to found ZF for its own sake would not have helped. Having a Foundation is a major step if we can manage to have it built community-oriented. If you remember well, I did ask some questions about the tone of the IRC chat which I did not feel as an opened discussion : rather I felt it as a suite of questions/answers about things that were presented like facts. I had the feeling that my reaction was already misunderstood my some of the attendants. So I did not even think of speaking of the trademark question... which had striked me as one of the critical points : IIRC, the TM was the first thing mentioned in ZC longer explanation. The ZF proposal is out since some weeks. There was meanwhile an IRC chat with Rob, a lengthy discussion on the mailing list and Rob spoke at Europython. I can not remember having heard any objections from ZEA against this proposal. I have not heard any public statements of Paul Everitt at Europython during the ZF presentation *against* the ZF. There is nothing against the ZF : there is sthing against ZC being the sole owner of the TMs when the current value of it has been established by the community as a whole, especially out of USA. This is why I support the proposal made by a few members of the community to have the ZF own the TMs and that would give a perpetual license to Zope Corporation to use it. For instance, ...it would be far better for everyone if Zope Corporation were instead to transfer the trademark to the foundation and receive a perpetual/irrevocable/etc. license back. posted by webmaven on plope.org see http://plope.org/Members/chrism/namechange/talkback/1120068594/discussionitem_view Speaking as independent developer - neither representing the interests of ZC nor of ZEA - I find these behind-the-curtain negotiations extremely counterproductive from the community point of view and definitely not in the sense of the Zope community. -aj It's definitely better to speak about it in the open air, where we all will be able to think about it together. Disclaimer : I'd like to remind english-only-speaking readers that my mothertongue is french not english. IOW, some of my words may need to be explained rather than taken literally. -- Godefroid Chapelle (aka __gotcha)- BubbleNet http://bubblenet.be ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: ZTUtils.Iterator value in ZPT
Thanks Tres. The 1's are explained for sure but I can't see a always doing the job for this. What I need is an object that keeps track of the last number given to it so it will supply the next based on its state. For use in a flat form with say a dozen fields you are not repeating over each field but still you need an incrementing tabindex value. In this case no repeat is necessary but each call to tabindex still requires next value and you can't do this if there if state is not available. I thought I could use the built-in iterator in this way but 1 or 0 for next will not return what I need from the instance. Could a method be added to existing Iterator class to provide the current or next value of Iterator instance for this purpose as opposed to true and false. Maybe called them currval and nextval or similar. I hoping not to have to create a product just to do this. Regards David On Wednesday, July 20, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Pratt wrote: Hi Chris. Thanks for your reply. My understanding (which may be flawed) is that ZTUtils iterator provides values of a sequence as you iterate over them with a repeat statement. I believe what I am trying to do is sensible. I have looked at the api and can't seem to get the right magic using the methods provided. Tabindex for forms keeps track of tab position so when you use tab key it moves the cursor to next field tabindex in form . So if I have 5 input fields from top to bottom, I want to define an iterator object, and obtain the next number in the iterator when zpt does its thing to create the form so that I would have a tabindex starting at 1 and next field value would be 2, then 3 etc. A range by itself doesn't do the trick since it provides all values to the variable where I am looking only for a single number incremented to the next value. - From $ZOPE/lib/python/ZTUtils/Iterator: __doc__='''Iterator class Unlike the builtin iterators of Python 2.2+, these classes are designed to maintain information about the state of an iteration. The Iterator() function accepts either a sequence or a Python iterator. The next() method fetches the next item, and returns true if it succeeds. $Id: Iterator.py,v 1.9.42.2 2003/11/04 19:27:43 evan Exp $''' Note that last sentence, which explains why you are seeing the '1' value everywere. 'tal:repeat' over a range should get you what you want; I don't think you *need* an iterator for your use case. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC3lB++gerLs4ltQ4RAuvSAJwPRCNefT9753fli0xOL7EEnRRHgwCggT/C M3ysckA7tZJZkZ0I10xgkLI= =jzat -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] How to get the download window option for file widget field?
Try the Plone mailing list. That's where they discuss archetypes a lot.
On 7/20/05, praveen kumar nagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear All,
I have created one ARCHETYPE having few fields for
FileWidget, to
upload the file.
Problem::In the base view page i want to get the
download window
option(same like when u try to download a file) while
clicking on link
to download those file contents
*Code which I have given in archetype for
FILE**
FileField('reserveform',
searchable=1,
required=0,
schemata='DetailedInfo3',
widget=FileWidget(label='Reservation
Form'))
FileField('enquiry',
searchable=1,
required=0,
schemata='DetailedInfo5',
widget=FileWidget(label='Enquiry Form'))
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
___
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
--
Peter Bengtsson,
work www.fry-it.com
home www.peterbe.com
hobby www.issuetrackerproduct.com
___
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Hi Godefroid, Godefroid Chapelle wrote: It's definitely better to speak about it in the open air, where we all will be able to think about it together. Amen. I wasn't aware of this until ten minutes ago, and now it seems a whole bunch of stuff has gone on, up to and including people getting shirty with each other, which I would have liked to have known about earlier. I'm an independent developer and I'm pretty quiet in the community, but I've pretty much bet my livelihood on Zope - this stuff /matters/ to me! What makes me unhappy about this is people making sweeping and inaccurate statements which also imply bad faith. The idea that an organisation that only registered a trademark in one territory describes the registration of the same mark in a /different/ territory as a violation is very irksome because it ignores the nature of trademark law (in which context ZC not registering it in Europe is negligence, plain and simple, if they want to pursue it), but infinitely more irksome is the implication that this was somehow done in bad faith, when what little I know about it indicates the exact opposite. This has the potential to make the Zope community look like muppets, and not in a good Swedish chef kind of way... -- Regards, PhilK Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Public key: http://www.xfr.co.uk Voicemail Facsimile: 07092 070518 You'll find that one part's sweet and one part's tart: say where the sweetness and the sourness start. - Tony Harrison ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Zope Foundation Update
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 07:07:25PM -0400, Rob Page wrote: [snip] During my stay at EuroPython I learned that eighteen months ago (and without Zope Corporation's knowledge or consent) Zope Europe Association (ZEA) registered a trademark consisting of the Cirlce-Z (the stylized Z surrounded by a circle) followed by the word ZOPE (hereinafter Circle-Z-Zope). The mark they registered is identical to the corporate logo used by Zope Corporation. At the Zope Europe Association Web site (http://www.zope-europe.org/), the logo is 3 cubes with a 3-dimensional look. Has Zope Europe Association registered the Circle-Z-Zope trademark but is not using it? Or is there another Zope Europe Association? Or, have they registered it for future use? Or, if you can register a trademark in different countries, have they registered it so as to protect it from miss-use by someone else? Dave [snip] -- Dave Kuhlman http://www.rexx.com/~dkuhlman ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: ZCTextIndex - Collector Item #505?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jonathan wrote: I have encountered an unusual situation which I believe may be related to collector item #505 (http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/505 - ZCTextUndex should not hold a reference to a lexicon). Prior to performing a ZCatalog update I cleared the catalog (using the clear catalog option under the Advanced tab of the ZMI); then, to clear out the Lexicon, I deleted the Lexicon and created a new Lexicon (id of both was 'Lexicon'). I then added about 805,000 records to the ZCatalog (which went smoothly) and tested catalog searches - all went well, including globbing searches, 'and', 'and not' searches. The previous Lexicon had 764,410 word entries. The current Lexicon has 0 word entries. The ZCatalog and ZCTextIndex appear to be working ok, so I am guessing that somehow the ZCTextIndex is using a 'hidden/old' version of the Lexicon (not the newly created version) - which is very strange, as the .fs file was packed prior to the update (so any old versions should have been deleted). This activity was all performed on a linux server running zope 2.6.1 Finally, the questions: 1) Can ZCTextIndex really be using the some other version of the Lexicon (which I can not access via the ZMI)? Yes, it can. The ZCTextIndex holds an attribute, 'index', which is an instance of either OkapiIndex or CosineIndex. That subobject also holds a reference to the lexicon, which is the reason for the collector follow-up: = Comment - Entry #2 by Caseman on Aug 14, 2002 5:45 pm Partial fix in place. I still need to resolve the deeper reference held in the actual index object that ZCTextIndex delegates to (more fun and games) 2) Was Collector Item #505 ever fixed (I can not find a reference to issue #505 in any of the zope change logs)? No, it has not been fixed. The workaround in your case is to delete the entire ZCTextIndex, re-add it, and re-index your content. You might be able to revivify the current lexicon by opening the database yourself, but the risk / reward ratio is pretty steep, compared to just recreating the index. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC3nIO+gerLs4ltQ4RAsPKAJ4woaBODws9bZeoZ3AklTrrL/w1FgCfVhmb spNBGhNwM8QfAWeAd7LySQI= =nwRs -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: ZCTextIndex - Collector Item #505?
Thanks for the info Tres. For now I will leave the ZCatalog/ZCTextIndex as-is (I don't really need to access the Lexicon via the ZMI - it is just nice to check how many entries the indexing process has created), and will 'delete/re-create' the Lexicon AND the ZCTextIndex during next months update cycle. Thanks again, Jonathan - Original Message - From: Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: zope@zope.org Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 11:47 AM Subject: [Zope] Re: ZCTextIndex - Collector Item #505? -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jonathan wrote: I have encountered an unusual situation which I believe may be related to collector item #505 (http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/505 - ZCTextUndex should not hold a reference to a lexicon). Prior to performing a ZCatalog update I cleared the catalog (using the clear catalog option under the Advanced tab of the ZMI); then, to clear out the Lexicon, I deleted the Lexicon and created a new Lexicon (id of both was 'Lexicon'). I then added about 805,000 records to the ZCatalog (which went smoothly) and tested catalog searches - all went well, including globbing searches, 'and', 'and not' searches. The previous Lexicon had 764,410 word entries. The current Lexicon has 0 word entries. The ZCatalog and ZCTextIndex appear to be working ok, so I am guessing that somehow the ZCTextIndex is using a 'hidden/old' version of the Lexicon (not the newly created version) - which is very strange, as the .fs file was packed prior to the update (so any old versions should have been deleted). This activity was all performed on a linux server running zope 2.6.1 Finally, the questions: 1) Can ZCTextIndex really be using the some other version of the Lexicon (which I can not access via the ZMI)? Yes, it can. The ZCTextIndex holds an attribute, 'index', which is an instance of either OkapiIndex or CosineIndex. That subobject also holds a reference to the lexicon, which is the reason for the collector follow-up: = Comment - Entry #2 by Caseman on Aug 14, 2002 5:45 pm Partial fix in place. I still need to resolve the deeper reference held in the actual index object that ZCTextIndex delegates to (more fun and games) 2) Was Collector Item #505 ever fixed (I can not find a reference to issue #505 in any of the zope change logs)? No, it has not been fixed. The workaround in your case is to delete the entire ZCTextIndex, re-add it, and re-index your content. You might be able to revivify the current lexicon by opening the database yourself, but the risk / reward ratio is pretty steep, compared to just recreating the index. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC3nIO+gerLs4ltQ4RAsPKAJ4woaBODws9bZeoZ3AklTrrL/w1FgCfVhmb spNBGhNwM8QfAWeAd7LySQI= =nwRs -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ) ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Philip Kilner wrote: This has the potential to make the Zope community look like muppets, and not in a good Swedish chef kind of way... I'm not sure muppetism applies to the Zope community, it appears to be Zope Corporation who are coming out of this looking less than clever. It's a shame, because really, they should be the ones benefitting from the community they've created, but instead they're more and more isolating themselves from a community which is finally starting to realise that Zope's continued popularity is not predicated on the survival of Zope Corporation. I hope Lois in particular reads this and understands that you can't bully an open source community, and doing so is likely going have much worse consequences for the bully in the medium to long term than it will for the people being bullied. cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Hi Chris, Chris Withers wrote: This has the potential to make the Zope community look like muppets, and not in a good Swedish chef kind of way... I'm not sure muppetism applies to the Zope community, it appears to be Zope Corporation who are coming out of this looking less than clever. Agreed/understood - but ZC are part of the community, too - the BDFL part, I guess. I was trying to be as inclusive as possible, since it takes two to get into these messes... -- Regards, PhilK Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Public key: http://www.xfr.co.uk Voicemail Facsimile: 07092 070518 You'll find that one part's sweet and one part's tart: say where the sweetness and the sourness start. - Tony Harrison ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Philip Kilner wrote: Agreed/understood - but ZC are part of the community, too - the BDFL part, I guess. Well, ZC are becoming less benign and more dictatorial, and that's where the BDFL model breaks down... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Godefroid Chapelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is nothing against the ZF : there is sthing against ZC being the sole owner of the TMs when the current value of it has been established by the community as a whole, especially out of USA. This is why I support the proposal made by a few members of the community to have the ZF own the TMs and that would give a perpetual license to Zope Corporation to use it. This is beyond my understanding. ZC created Zope. ZC created the brand. ZC is called Zope Corp. Why on earth would they relinquish the core asset that is their trademark and branding? It's theirs. They're giving the full use of it to the community. What's wrong with that? Why do you want, require, more? The current state of what ZC proposes doesn't prevent anyone from doing anything reasonable. Give them your hand, and they'll ask for your arm... Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] should stream iterator be used for ZODB-generated string file?
Petri Savolainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We have an application whereby multimegabyte strings, each generated from the contents of several thousands of small objects in ZODB, are downloaded from zope as a CSV files. A particular CSV file is typically downloaded once or twice a day at a maximum. The major issue is that it takes a long time for the download to start. Would it be possible to use a stream iterator (introduced in zope 2.7.1) or should we simply do chunks of REQUEST.write() ? What are the requirements for using chunked REQUEST.write - do some specific HTTP headers need to be set or does zope take care of it all? You may need to set the Content-Length yourself, if you want it. Otherwise REQUEST.write is pretty simple to use. The only thing is that it ties up a Zope thread during the output. Any advice or specific pointers would be appreciated. I've googled all I could find about the stream iterators, serving blobs etc. but all the info seems to be focused on serving large filesystem-based data. I am not sure what parts of that info applies to an use case that involves reading data from ZODB, or if stream iterators make sense for the use case at all. I guess we could generate a temporary file and then serve that using a stream iterator. It would still take time to generate the temporary file, though. I understand some parts of the zope machinery could perhaps be released faster that way, but I wonder if the benefits are worth the extra step. If you do it properly you end up handing off the file to the asyncore machinery which frees your Zope threads to do other more intersting things than serving bytes. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: performance of textindexng2 vs. zctextindex
Thanks for your response, Andreas, and thanks for writing TXNG in the first place. I really appreciate the contribution. I recently installed TextIndexNG2 2.1.1 which is *pretty old*. Take a look at the v 2.2.0 which has been optimized over the time in different ways. Consider using StupidStorage as documented in the release notes. Question re v 2.2.0: on this page http://www.zope.org/Members/ajung/TextIndexNG there are three possibilities 2.2.0, 2.2.0b1, 2.2.0b2. The last modified column indicates that 2.2.0 has been modified most recently, but I'm assuming that the b1 b2 versions are in fact more recent. Is that true? Also, 2.2.0b1 is around 2MB, whereas the other two are 600K and I noticed after downloading 2.2.0 that stemming support seems absent. So, from all this I'm assuming that if I want stemming support I should grab the 2MB 2.2.0b1. Is that right? I'll look into StupidStorage. I've been struck that if the number of search hits is high, TextIndexNG2 is much slower than ZCTextIndex. For example, if I do a search on 'podcast' (our site deals w/ podcasting) I get about 14,000 hits. ZCTextIndex returns the results in about 0.1 seconds; TextIndexNG2 takes 31 seconds or 300 times longer. In general, the more hits there are, the bigger the difference between the two search indexes. Query speed depends on different things: the query, the implementation, the operations needed to be performed during the query. Because of some functionality TXNG needs to store much more information than ZCTextIndex. It did this as said above sometimes in a not so efficient way (see above). You might also look at TextIndexNG V3. V3 is appealing but we're running 2.7.6 and I'm not sure that I want the hassle of installing Five at this point. When we go to 2.8, which we'll probably due in a couple of months, V3 will be an option. Thanks for your help, Francis ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: performance of textindexng2 vs. zctextindex
--On 20. Juli 2005 11:22:37 -0700 Francis Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Question re v 2.2.0: on this page http://www.zope.org/Members/ajung/TextIndexNG there are three possibilities 2.2.0, 2.2.0b1, 2.2.0b2. The last modified column indicates that 2.2.0 has been modified most recently, but I'm assuming that the b1 b2 versions are in fact more recent. Is that true? Why should beta versions be more recent than the final version? 2.2.0 is the latest. Also, 2.2.0b1 is around 2MB, whereas the other two are 600K and I noticed after downloading 2.2.0 that stemming support seems absent. This is documented in the release notes. 2.2.0 does not support stemming anymore. -aj pgp5DGNJ6VxNo.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] More TM ideas
Following up to my note from yesterday. ZEA *is* the official registrant (but not legitimate owner) of the Cirlce-Z-Zope (CZZ) mark in many countries in the Madrid Protocol. You can search the WIPO database for Zope and find it. Zope Corporation is the official registrant of the word Zope in many countries in the Madrid Protocol and our registration predates the ZEAs. Since the ZEA registration is based on the word Zope we believe that an official trademark opposition will be successful. We are also only willing to pay the fees that Zope Corporation would otherwise have had to pay to register the marks itself. This offer was made in writing last Friday. The subtle but important point is that ZEA seems to be willing to transfer the marks to the Zope Foundation not Zope Corporation. This seems to be the essence of the difference in our position. If this is inaccurate -- i.e., ZEA is willing to transfer the marks to ZC with no strings attached then we can chalk this up to some incredible communication issue and can certainly move forward! It seems that the prospect of Zope Corporation's unfair (and unprecedented) management of the marks is the real issue. So that our position and policy are clear: *** We will not use (nor allow our successors or assigns) to use the Zope trademarks in non-competitive ways. *** The challenge is to figure out how to get this in place. One idea might be to make the BoD of the Zope Foundation the arbiter of any revocation action ZC might take. This would be a contractual relationship between ZC (and its successors and assigns) and the ZF. If ZC felt that a given ZC-licensed use of the marks had become inappropriate we would move to revoke the trademark license. If the license holder was unsatisfied with the revocation they would appeal to the Zope Foundation which, on vote of a supermajority of the BoD could overrule ZC's revocation action. It is our heartfelt sense that Zope Corporation is more likely to defend (within guidelines and process) the marks than a volunteer-led Foundation. We have heard comments that suggest that the Foundation should not be in the business of enforcement. Enforcement is an active responsibility. Perhaps once (and while) ZF has full-time staff to pursue Foundation business (including TM matters) the Foundation would be the first stop for tm issues. It has been reported that ZEA's original registration of the marks was defensive and done in an effort to preclude registrations from being made by unfriendly parties. We find it simply surprising that the first mention of their registrations to us was 18 months (!) after the fact. ZEA does not represent the entire Zope community in Europe (nor do they claim to) and certainly don't represent the global Zope community. In fact, we should all recognize that the ZEA competes with non-ZEA companies on proposals. That's fine, expected and natural. However, any action on ZEA's part that was made on behalf of the community is inappropriate. ZC does not claim to represent the whole Zope Community either. We are asserting our ownership (and, we think) aggressive desire to manage the marks and brand in a vendor-neutral way. With respect to ZEA's ownership of the Plone trademark - I am told by two people that ZEA helped register the Plone mark as a service to the Plone Foundation and that it has been or is in the process of being transferred. Presuming this is true I stand corrected. Even this morning the WIPO database advertises ZEA as the registrant of record for the mark. Regards, Rob -- Rob Page V: 540 361 1710 Zope Corporation F: 703 995 0412 ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Dave Kuhlman wrote: On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 07:07:25PM -0400, Rob Page wrote: [snip] During my stay at EuroPython I learned that eighteen months ago (and without Zope Corporation's knowledge or consent) Zope Europe Association (ZEA) registered a trademark consisting of the Cirlce-Z (the stylized Z surrounded by a circle) followed by the word ZOPE (hereinafter Circle-Z-Zope). The mark they registered is identical to the corporate logo used by Zope Corporation. At the Zope Europe Association Web site (http://www.zope-europe.org/), the logo is 3 cubes with a 3-dimensional look. Has Zope Europe Association registered the Circle-Z-Zope trademark but is not using it? Apparently. Go to: http://www.wipo.int/ipdl/en/search/madrid/search-struct.jsp and enter Zope in the Holder Name field and click Search. You will see 5 results. The first is for the Zope Corporation registration of the name Zope, registered in May 2004. The next four results are for ZEA's registrations of the Zope and Plone marks, with logos (2 each, for different sets of countries) registered in July and September of 2004. Or is there another Zope Europe Association? Nope, the addresses match. 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 maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: Connect to ms sql server from zope 2.8 on windows s erver
Hi, AJ Look at mxODBC or the latest version of ZODBCDA from zope.org. I'm free download egenix-mx-base-2.0.6.win32-py2.3.exe. I have install zope 2.8 for windows. I could not install egenix-mx-base-2.0.6.win32-py2.3.exe. Becouse it could not find python in registry. How to install egenix-mx-base-2.0.6.win32-py2.3.exe without python in registry. Please help me. You have three alternatives (perhaps four if you consider linux): First alternative: 1.1 Install the python 2.3.4 binaries (the python that comes with zope, isn't logged on the registry, so, you can't use it) 1.2 Install the the egenix binaries 1.3 Copy the egenix installed files to: C:\YourZopeFolder\lib\python If I'm not wrong, the binaries are installed on : C:\python2.3\lib\python2.1 - Make sure that you don't overwrite something in the zope's python. You can download the source code of egenix to have an idea of the files it installs 1.4 Uninstall python if you want Second alternative: 2.1 Create a folder called Python in C:\ 2.2 Create manualy this registry key: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Python\PythonCore\2.3\InstallPath] 2.3 Set its value to C:\Python 2.4 Install the egenix binaries (they will be installed somewhere on C:\Python). 2.5 Copy the egenix installed files to: C:\YourZopeFolder\lib\python 2.6 Delete the registry key Alternatively to step 2.2, you can get this registry file: http://www.zope.org/Members/SmileyChris/HowTo.2005-02-06.0339/pil_for_windows_fakepython.reg Before double clicking on it, change the 2.1 by 2.3 in your preffered text editor. Then you can double click on it and it will automatically install the key. Be aware that the key will remain on the registry till you manually delete it. Third alternative: Install python from source and then egenix. Here you need a C compiler. Finally copy the egenix files to C:\YourZopeFolder\lib\python I hope this was usefull. I did alternative 2 once and it worked. I haven't tested it recently, so, I can't guarantee it. Regards, Josef ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: question on python script, dtml method and options
Hi Erik, next_state does get initialized - it is the name of the submit buttons on my various forms. So, then it should be in the request object. Just to test it, put the following at the begining of your python script (You don't have to delelete anything): return request Then submit the form that calls the script and check if next_state is really a key in the request object. On the contrary, it could be an error in the html code where create the form. Regards, Josef ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: Re: Zope Foundation Update
Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This has to be one of the more ill-informed, offensive posts that I have seen from a member of the Zope community, and that's saying a lot. It's obvious that there's a good ventriloquist pulling Chris' strings, since he's making assertions that are so easily proven incorrect that they are laughable. I'm not sure muppetism applies to the Zope community, it appears to be Zope Corporation who are coming out of this looking less than clever. Yes, of course, we are looking less than clever. We offer up a Foundation. We give all of our ZPL copyrighted code to this Foundation. We give committers free membership and an equal number of board seats to vendors who pay for those board seats. Somehow, we're bad guys in this. I agree. Trying to work with some of the people in this community make me personally feel less than clever... ZEA takes marks _directly from our website_, registers them as their own, and they are white knights. You're a genius. It's a shame, because really, they should be the ones benefitting from the community they've created, but instead they're more and more isolating themselves from a community which is finally starting to realise that Zope's continued popularity is not predicated on the survival of Zope Corporation. See above. More and more we are isolating ourselves, by joining sprints internationally, contributing our code to a Foundation that _we_ are bringing to the community, and by offering to participate completely in the ECM project as well. I can see how this is isolationist. Again, you're a genius. I hope Lois in particular reads this and understands that you can't bully an open source community, and doing so is likely going have much worse consequences for the bully in the medium to long term than it will for the people being bullied. And now, for the ultimate in idiocy. Lois has not _once_ communicated directly with the community on anything other than announcements regarding training. Certainly, she has never bullied the community on any topic, including the Foundation. So, how do I know you are being manipulated into making stupid public statements? Someone obviously had to tell you that Lois was involved in the ZEA discussions. Want to know how? Probably not, since you were stupid enough to parrot someone else's words, but for the benefit of everyone else who has a brain, and cares to really understand the truth, here goes: Rob and I had the only interactions with any ZEA members, and they were _exclusively_ with Xavier Heymans and Paul Everitt. After one exchange with Paul, he requested to be let out of the continued discussions due to potential conflicts of interest (which we respected). Lois received an email out of the clear blue from another ZEA member (who had not been on any of the emails between Rob, Paul, Xavier and myself). He reached out to Lois asking her to participate in a conference call with him, another ZEA member (also not on any previous communications) and Xavier. Rob and I were not invited to participate in this call. Lois was _not_ in the loop on our side either previous to this attempt to reach out to her. The three ZEA members discussed the issue with Lois for 70 minutes. I doubt they reached out to her because they thought she was the bully in our bunch. At the end of the conversation, Lois came to Rob and I and supported some of the requests that ZEA made in terms of compensation for the transfer. The amount that was originally requested (20,000 EUROS, plus additional transfer fees) was absurd to me, and even though Lois was willing to find a middle ground, she was the messenger that related to them that management rejected their offer. Three days later, Lois wrote back a note to Xavier (this past Friday), again playing the messenger, with a offer to pay any expenses that we otherwise would have had to pay to be the original registrars of the marks. It is my contention that if someone steals something from you, you shouldn't have to pay them a premium to get it back, should you? We have had no response to that note, and we informed them more than a week in advance that we would make this matter public if they didn't respond. Obviously, they didn't mind it being made public, or they would have found a way to work it out. Now, let's continue with the history lesson, this time concentrating on me, rather than Lois. I invested in Zope Corporation (then Digital Creations) in October 1998. I was the largest investor (using my personal money) then, and through two additional rounds of funding remain the largest single personal investor (by a long shot!). So, my money is where my mouth is in this company. It was _me_, and me alone that suggested in November of 1998 that we open source the software (before it was even called Zope). It was me that discussed the licensing issues with Bruce Perens to come up with ZPL 1.0. It was me who discussed the
[Zope] Added Product Doesn't Show Up In ZMI
Hi All, I'm having a rather strange problem. I'm trying to get the Issue Dealer (http://www.nidelven-it.no/products/issue_dealer) product up-and-running on my Zope install (FreeBSD 4.11, Zope 2.7.1, Python 2.3.4). According to the Issue Dealer docs, I should simply be able to unzip it into the Products directory, restart Zope, and go, just like normal. I've done this, however, and nothing happens. Issue Dealer doesn't show up in /Control_Panel/Products, or the [Add] dropdown. No broken products, no nothing. Nothing looks at all unusual in the Products directory on the file system. I've tried rebooting the machine and restarting from the ZMI, to no avail. Has anyone seen this before? Any ideas? Thanks, Aaron ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Added Product Doesn't Show Up In ZMI
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: zope@zope.org Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 5:41 PM Subject: [Zope] Added Product Doesn't Show Up In ZMI Hi All, I'm having a rather strange problem. I'm trying to get the Issue Dealer (http://www.nidelven-it.no/products/issue_dealer) product up-and-running on my Zope install (FreeBSD 4.11, Zope 2.7.1, Python 2.3.4). According to the Issue Dealer docs, I should simply be able to unzip it into the Products directory, restart Zope, and go, just like normal. I've done this, however, and nothing happens. Issue Dealer doesn't show up in /Control_Panel/Products, or the [Add] dropdown. No broken products, no nothing. Nothing looks at all unusual in the Products directory on the file system. I've tried rebooting the machine and restarting from the ZMI, to no avail. Make sure that you have a '__init__.py' file in the top level directory of the Issue Dealer subdirectory tree, and also check to see if there are any messages in the log file (.../zope/var/logger.log or something similar). hth Jonathan ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Florent Guillaume wrote: The current state of what ZC proposes doesn't prevent anyone from doing anything reasonable. Give them your hand, and they'll ask for your arm... Indeed. I don't have any problem with ZC keeping the trademarks, but why are they tying the creation of the foundation onto their retreival of their lost marks? The two seem totally unconnected to me... Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: Re: Zope Foundation Update
Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Florent Guillaume wrote: The current state of what ZC proposes doesn't prevent anyone from doing anything reasonable. Give them your hand, and they'll ask for your arm... Indeed. I don't have any problem with ZC keeping the trademarks, but why are they tying the creation of the foundation onto their retreival of their lost marks? The two seem totally unconnected to me... Considering that we have agreed to license our marks to the Foundation, and that the lawyers tell us that this is the first step, we have to have _clear title_ to them in order to have a valid license agreement. If there's an ongoing trademark dispute, then we can't cleanly license the marks to the Foundation. It seemed obvious to us in our post that we were explaining this, but it must not have been clear enough. Is it clear now? ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
[Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Hadar Pedhazur wrote: ZC says: the marks were stolen ZEA seems to be saying: the marks were registered defensively. My read on this is that there is a serious communication problem going on here between the lines. Why doesn't Paul come out and state what the ZEA position is? Why are ZC's words so angry? ZC saying the marks were stolen seems a little over the top. What if ZEA registered them defensively? if that's possible then ZEA should be given then benefit of the doubt and not be called a thief. If there was a need to register them to protect zope, then why didn't ZC do it? Everybody needs to calm down, stop insulting each other and stop broadcasting this problem to the whole world on zope-announce (for example). Its making us all look childish. Making either side into the bad guy is not only innacurate but also inappropriate and is not conducive to building a community around the software we all love and are grateful to ZC and non-ZC related programmers alike for, Zope. -- george donnelly ~ http://www.zettai.net/ ~ Quality Zope Hosting Complete Zope Hosting ~ Managed Servers ~ Plone Hosting Solutions Y/AIM: zettainet ~ Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ Sales: (866) 408-5395 ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
Everybody needs to calm down, stop insulting each other and stop broadcasting this problem to the whole world on zope-announce (for example). Its making us all look childish. +1. Please folks, remember that this is a public venue and your words will be archived for a long time. Let's have no more name-calling, and no more mysterious digs at named and unnamed third parties. FWIW, I think the Foundation is an important and commendable initiative, and I think ZC has been doing a pretty good job of supporting and reaching out to the community lately. And now more than ever, the amount of software that we get free (and Free) from ZC is just staggering. The trademark issue is an unfortunate, if unignorable, distraction from the progress that's being made. I remain hopeful that an amicable solution is forthcoming. -PW ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Re: [Zope] Re: Zope Foundation Update
--On 20. Juli 2005 19:17:59 -0500 George Donnelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hadar Pedhazur wrote: ZC says: the marks were stolen ZEA seems to be saying: the marks were registered defensively. My read on this is that there is a serious communication problem going on here between the lines. Why doesn't Paul come out and state what the ZEA position is? Why are ZC's words so angry? I am disappointed hearing that ZEA registered the trademarks silently already 18 months ago. The German Zope User Group (DZUG) asked ZC for permission using the Zope logo and the domain name zope.de for our community websites (which was never a problem). But in this case we would have to ask ZEA for permission as keeper of the trademarks in Europe?! I am sorry to say this but the secrecy on the ZEA side is not really acceptable. I can understand ZEA argument to have registered the trademarks for defending Zope from improper use but why did not you notify ZC or the community about it? As someone working in the Zope business I need to know who is having what and why. Such things should not kept secret when you are dealing in the open-source business. So this whole issue is a shame for the complete Zope community. -aj pgpLmh9Ka2uMx.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
