Brian Brinegar wrote at 2010-3-16 10:12 -0400:
Our university relies heavily on a Zope product based on Dieter Maurer's
Reference product. Recently, we upgraded from Zope 2.9.6 to Zope
2.11.x and found some changes in behavior.
In short the Reference product creates a Symlink like pointer in the
Dieter Maurer wrote at 2010-3-16 17:42 +0100:
Brian Brinegar wrote at 2010-3-16 10:12 -0400:
Our university relies heavily on a Zope product based on Dieter Maurer's
Reference product. Recently, we upgraded from Zope 2.9.6 to Zope
2.11.x and found some changes in behavior.
In short the Reference
Gaute Amundsen wrote at 2009-12-1 14:33 +0100:
We have ZopeProfiler 1.72 installed on a site (Zope 2.7.5-1.fc3) that
don't need it anymore.
I've removed the folder and deleted the product, but I cant' find a way
to remove it form the controlpanel.
I notice it's been asked once before, but I cant
Allen Schmidt Sr. wrote at 2009-10-4 16:40 -0400:
So...we are on 2.8.10 and our biggest app on our site is a ZClass based
news object. How close will this provide functionality to just drop our
data.fs into 2.12 and have those zclasses work?
I do not know.
ZClasses have quite vast
The Zope developers have ripped out the ZClasses functionality from
the Zope core in version 2.12.
As promised, I have collected the former code in a new package
(dm.zopepatches.zclasses on PyPI). When imported, this package
uses monkey patching to restore the ZClasses functionality.
New tests
I verified using your process that it is indeed just a folder. So I deleted
the session_folder in the root and then tried to add a ZODB mount point in the
root and it showed the session_folder was ready to be created. I made sure
that option was checked and clicked Ok. It reloaded the root
Allen Schmidt Sr. wrote at 2009-8-4 13:45 -0400:
...
In the ZMI, there are:
/session_folder/ ( a regular folder )
session_data ( Transient Object Container )
/session_data_manager ( Session Data Manager )
All the parts seem right but its not workingsession writes wind up
as
Dennis Allison wrote at 2009-7-19 17:03 -0700:
Zope 2.11, Python 2.4
...
# EOFError
#
# Traceback (most recent call last):
...
dest_base_info, dest_sub_info = self._getRemoteList(remote, path)
File /opt/zope/zinstances/xxx/Products/ZSyncer/ZSyncer.py, line
1211,
in _getRemoteList
return
Peter Bengtsson wrote at 2009-4-13 15:03 +0100:
- Chris, I rarely agree with you but I actually like your fearless
and provocative bashing for the sake (hopefully) of stirring up some
action.
- Andreas, you've done a great job with Zope but let's raise the bar
and not pass judgement on peoples
Martin Aspeli wrote at 2009-4-12 18:31 +0800:
Finally, there is not total parity between Zope 2 security and Zope 3
security. Zope 2 cannot protect 'property set', for example.
Since Zope 2.8, Zope 2 could in principle -- and until quite recently
I thought, it really can: it only fails
Martin Aspeli wrote at 2009-4-12 18:31 +0800:
...
3) Change the Permission class in AccessControl so that it tries to
look up an IPermission utility and use the title of that utility as the
permission name, falling back on the current behaviour of using the
passed permission name directly.
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-13 03:14 +0100:
The context for this is trying to get ParsedXML 1.5 running on Zope 2.12
under Python 2.5 (don't ask why!)
Anyway, ParsedXML has a class:
class ManageableNodeList(ManageableWrapper, DOMProxy.NodeListProxy,
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2009-4-10 18:33 +0200:
Is anyone interested in maintaining Zope 3?
You should leave a bit more time before you take any drastic actions...
There are holidays, time of intensive other activity,
...
* the thing that has some kind of documentation website - do you
Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2009-4-11 14:35 +0200:
...
In all other debates we seemed to agree on not over specifying
requirements in setup.py files, I wonder why anybody still tries to
follow this route.
Because the way the Zope 2.12a1 egg did it has broken within a few weeks
--
Dieter
Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2009-4-11 15:05 +0200:
...
+1, to declaring Zope 3 dead. That should allow us to refactor the
remaining packages much more aggressively and reduce the dependencies.
You (Zope developers) are very fast in declaring things dead and
destroy things application developers
Lennart Regebro wrote at 2009-4-11 16:12 +0200:
...
Does easy_install keep track of already installed dependencies and
refuse to install it if it break dependencies?
easy_install checks dependencies only at installation time -- for the egg
that is installed (not for those that are already
Andrew Milton wrote at 2009-4-11 21:46 +1000:
...
So your position is, the code is fine, but, the docs suck so don't use
it. Well the docs have always sucked, the zope-3 docs don't seem any
better. Perhaps the people deprecating and removing interfaces willy-nilly
should document the
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-4-12 09:52 +0200:
@Dieter: participate or be silent.
I do not obey your orders.
You are Zope 2 release manager and part of the
Foundation board -- but you do not have command power over things outside
the Zope 2 release management and the foundation.
Thus, I
censorship.
Thus, should you soon no longer hear from me, you know what happened
Here the complete message of Andreas (in German):
From: Andreas Jung li...@zopyx.com
To: Dieter Maurer die...@handshake.de
Subject: Re: [Zope] [Zope-dev] Zope 4.0, maybe not such a bad idea...
Date: Sun, 12 Apr
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2009-4-8 15:31 +0200:
...
In order to make Zope 2 and Zope 3 fit the pattern, it'd be nice if they
had names that fit the Zope is a project, not software pattern. We
could rename Zope 2 to Zope Classic, as was suggested. I think we should
also rename Zope 3 to
Wichert Akkerman wrote at 2009-4-9 10:40 +0200:
Previously Shane Hathaway wrote:
discussion type=bikeshed
Tres Seaver wrote:
WRT the Framework name: framework is a misleading name for the
collection of packages salvaged from the new Coke effort: it is
actually a *bunch* of frameworks,
Tim Nash wrote at 2009-4-5 14:05 -0700:
Also, I have been critical of the zope 3 line because I love zope 2
and it appears to me that zope 3 is killing zope 2.
I share your feeling.
With my current experience, the Zope 3 way to handle skins is considerably more
work then the previous CMF
Bobby wrote at 2009-4-7 09:58 -0700:
td colspan=3
a href=?table=dtml-var tableorder_by=dtml-var
order_bysort=dtml-var sortstart=dtml-var
previous-sequenceprevious/a
a href=?table=dtml-var tableorder_by=dtml-var
order_bysort=dtml-var sortstart=dtml-var next-sequencenext/a
Christian Theune wrote at 2009-4-3 08:45 +0200:
...
I don't want to change the process structure: I only want to assure that
the processes we start also quit.
Then no objection from me.
--
Dieter
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 20:36 +0100:
...
Personally, I evaluate such eggs in a sandbox, and then add them to the
project-specific index once I'm sure that they work with the other
software in the index: I don't use PyPI at all when building out
production sites.
That seems overly
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 20:42 +0100:
...
KGS the
concept is very easy to implement; you just make available on some URL a
buildout versions.cfg, or you run your own package index.
OK, the former I can see happening on an end-user project, the latter is
just too much work.
Tres has
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 21:29 +0100:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Andrew others have been working on this issue at the sprint. There is
consensus that www.zope.org must be turned into landing page with some
mission statement and then links to the related subprojects. The current
zope.org site
Marius Gedminas wrote at 2009-4-3 01:34 +0300:
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 07:31:00PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
So, svn.zope.org causes me pain at the moment:
- it uses the bizarre svn or svn+ssh protocols, which I find annoying
(ports blocked on routers, can't check with a browser, etc)
+10
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 21:29 +0100:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Andrew others have been working on this issue at the sprint. There is
consensus that www.zope.org must be turned into landing page with some
mission statement and then links to the related subprojects. The current
zope.org site
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 20:22 +0100:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
SkinnedFolder (at least if you mean
http://www.handshake.de/~dieter/pyprojects/zope/index.html#bct_sec_4.7;)
makes CMFCore's SkinsTool available (without the need to use
CMFDefault or portal objects).
That might involve getting
Christian Theune wrote at 2009-4-2 13:30 +0200:
if tests spawn non-daemon threads, then the test runner can get stuck.
The easiest way that I see is to always --exit-with-status and to make
--exist-with-status also call sys.exit() when the tests passed.
I do not understand the implication.
Do
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 19:44 +0100:
...
I prefer using password-protected (as opposed to key-protected) https.
What do other people prefer?
I am fine with the ssh access.
True, the initial setup was a bit difficult (the key program
did not like the . in d.maurer -- but forgot to tell
Jacob Holm wrote at 2009-4-2 20:44 +0200:
...
For write access I completely agree. For read-only unauthenticated
access it would be nice to be able to use http(s). It may be possible to
have it all at the same time.
I have been told that there are mirrors of the Zope SVN repository
providing
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-4-2 20:24 +0100:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
I am very happy about stable packages because I often extend them.
For example, I have extended LocalFS to allow configuration of
its instances via environment variables. This allows us to synchronize
our ZODBs in the test
Cesar Canassa wrote at 2009-3-30 14:54 -0300:
It would be possible to modify the plonectl script in order to make it run
without using the zdaemon?
As someone modified zopectl to run under Windows without zdaemon
(in newer Zope versions), it should be possible to change
plonectl in a similar way.
Martin Aspeli wrote at 2009-4-1 22:02 +0800:
I'd like to add support for the following:
1) Provider decorator:
@provider(IFoo)
def some_function(context)
pass
I have already searched for this several times -- and was disappointed
about my failure :-)
--
Dieter
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-3-27 16:02 -0500:
...
Got zope.principalregistry 3.7.0.
While:
Installing zopetest.
Error: There is a version conflict.
We already have: zope.component 3.5.1
but zope.app.security 3.7.0 requires 'zope.component=3.6.0'.
Okay, so I thought I'd be smart and try
Cesar Canassa wrote at 2009-3-27 19:56 -0300:
Does Zope requires that a root user should exist on system in order to run
properly? I am asking this because when I try to run Zope as a daemon I got
this:
$ ./plonectl start
instance: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unlinking stale socket
Jim Fulton wrote at 2009-3-29 12:02 -0400:
...
2. Backtracking is more practical in buildout than with easy_install.
easy_install (not sure about pip) does conflict detection/resolution
at run time, whereas buildout does it at build time. Slow conflict
resolution is a lot more practical
thedag...@gmail.com wrote at 2009-3-28 00:16 +:
...
LocalFS has [not] been updated since 2006.
There is nothing in the zope world
that is as well maintained as plone. Sorry.
I would like to stress that stable packages (those that do not need to
be continously updated) are in fact a
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-3-28 14:13 -0500:
...
Installing Plone in such a case is only the solution if one has no better
idea about doing things. The Filesystem Directory View functionality
is available out-of-the-box through CMF (which is much smaller than Plone).
There was also something like
Aleksey Tsalolikhin wrote at 2009-3-28 21:57 -0700:
I recently migrated from Zope 2.7.8 to 2.10 and am now seeing
this error in my event.log:
2009-03-28T21:15:52 ERROR root Exception while rendering an error message
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
Bobby wrote at 2009-3-25 13:17 -0700:
I___
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
Dvir Bar-lev wrote at 2009-3-26 10:12 +0200:
I have a site with the following folder structure in zope:
Dvir
WebSite
contentPages
I have and index_html in the WebSite folder, in it I call a dtml method
that's in the contentPages folder named overview_html,
in the same folder
amol kumbhar wrote at 2009-3-27 18:39 +0530:
Actually I want to use SmartClient for my web site and for this I have to
add the SmartClient Library folder into zope so using this I can write JS
which include these libraries.
If you have a web server before Zope (recommended for production use),
Christian Theune wrote at 2009-3-23 14:44 +0100:
...
I usually just run the tests that I'm interested (-s or -t or a
combination) in during those times. I never had to go in and comment out
a test_suite function.
I had when I had run the ZODB test suite. Some tests deterministically
had hang --
Tim Knapp wrote at 2009-3-23 18:21 +1300:
I would like to override the DateTime.DateTime class within my
functional tests. I have tried mocking (via mocker) and injecting the
subclassed DateTime class into sys.modules (results in a
TraversalError). The fartherest I've gotten is to set
amol kumbhar wrote at 2009-3-25 10:28 +0530:
I am trying to execute following code
*import ZODB
from Persistence import Persistent
For Zope 2.8, the package/module structure has been drastically changed.
What used to be in Persistence is now in persistent.
I.e. you now use from persistent
In order to test my external 'ZClasses' implementation,
I easy_installed Zope2 (about 1 hour ago) -- but unfortunately,
the distribution is broken: version conflict zope.component 3.5.1 versus
zope.component 3.6.0.
Maybe, the eggification of Zope2 will not turn out to be an advantage --
at least
The Zope 2.12 documention tells that the test command was removed
from zopectl.
test was a convenient way to test products and packages in the
context of the instance. How is this use case now supported?
--
Dieter
___
Zope-Dev maillist -
The documentation on PyPI tells to look into doc/INSTALL.txt
to find installation instructions.
However, doc is not installed by the standard easy_install process.
Therefore, it is not so easy to find it.
Relevant documentation should be installed by the standard easy_install
process (it should
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-3-15 08:53 +0100:
On 15.03.2009 8:31 Uhr, Dieter Maurer wrote:
The Zope 2.12 documention tells that the test command was removed
from zopectl.
Have to investigate that.
test was a convenient way to test products and packages in the
context of the instance. How
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-3-15 08:56 +0100:
...
On 15.03.2009 8:36 Uhr, Dieter Maurer wrote:
The documentation on PyPI tells to look into doc/INSTALL.txt
to find installation instructions.
However, doc is not installed by the standard easy_install process.
Therefore, it is not so easy
Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2009-3-15 11:10 +0100:
Dieter Maurer wrote:
The Zope 2.12 documention tells that the test command was removed
from zopectl.
test was a convenient way to test products and packages in the
context of the instance. How is this use case now supported?
The normal way
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-3-15 08:48 +0100:
... Zope2 2.12.1a1 version conflict ...
...
In addition: setuptools 0.6c7 is pretty old and known to be broken in
some ways.
As expected, setuptool 0.6.c7 was not the problem.
After easy_install -U setuptools, an easy_install -U Zope2
leads to
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-3-15 08:48 +0100:
... Zope2 2.12.0a1 distribution broken ...
...
Try using the traditional
python bootstrap.py
bin/buildout
approach.
That (magically) worked.
--
Dieter
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-3-15 18:36 +0100:
...
test was a convenient way to test products and packages in the
context of the instance. How is this use case now supported?
Go with the buildout approach and use the alltests.cfg for testing
support (see alltests.cfg). Means: work with a SVN
Tres Seaver wrote at 2009-3-11 21:27 -0400:
...
In packages that don't load their own ZCML during the tests, it's harder
to say. One reaction could be that this package doesn't have enough
tests then! Of course another would argue that this is configuration
information only that can be
Tres Seaver wrote at 2009-3-12 14:25 -0400:
...
Sorry, I meant mandatory tests which load ZCML. I'm actually against
ever loading ZCML in tests at all.
If you ship ZCML, you should test it, no?
You will not ship ZCML, but this may not apply to everybody
--
Dieter
Tres Seaver wrote at 2009-3-13 16:20 -0400:
...
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote at 2009-3-12 14:25 -0400:
...
Sorry, I meant mandatory tests which load ZCML. I'm actually against
ever loading ZCML in tests at all.
If you ship ZCML, you should test it, no?
Not necessarily: in fact
Jean Jordaan wrote at 2009-3-12 04:11 -0700:
The only place I find a clue about 'read-only' is in
.../zope2/lib/python/ZODB/component.xml after grepping (after reading
Dieter's message)
That's what you should use for your read-only databases.
It describes a configuration option for your storage
Jacob Holm wrote at 2009-3-6 01:55 +0100:
...
I added it while working for ZC two years ago. It was needed to support
a use case where the context used for looking up the annotation was not
necessarily the current site. I don't know if the use case is still
relevant to ZC, but the pattern is
Roger Ineichen wrote at 2009-3-8 14:38 +0100:
...
Can you give an example of a meaningless deprecation
warning?
A few of the deprecations I have disliked for a long time:
/home/dieter/Z/Products/Archetypes/__init__.py:15: DeprecationWarning: The
module, 'Products.CMFCore.CMFCorePermissions'
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-3-8 12:26 +:
Nope, Zope 2.9.8.
In older ZODB versions, this should happen when your clock
jumped back into the past.
The clocks on both the storage servers are NTP synched and I'm pretty
sure they've not jumped back at any point...
Another (more serious) cause
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2009-3-3 00:36 +0100:
...
* how will the community make hard decisions where lots of people
disagree?
You try to achieve consensus. When you do not, you get the chance
that people turn away.
...
* who reminds us of necessary tasks and directions we're going into?
Martin Aspeli wrote at 2009-3-3 17:21 +0900:
...
How many times have we gotten bogged down in semantics or
naming discussions and killed off the momentum behind something?
A clear notion of semantics and well chosen names are important
for any project.
I would not want momentum resulting in
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2009-3-3 22:11 +0100:
...
backwards compatibility at all costs,
I agree that have erred on the side of too much backwards compatibility.
That increased the overhead of changes tremendously and blocked innovation.
Large applications are built upon the framework.
If
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2009-3-5 17:35 +0100:
Perhaps it's time to deprecate the deprecation system.
...
Thoughts?
+1
--
Dieter
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML
Dan Korostelev wrote at 2009-3-5 22:14 +0300:
...
-0.75 for removing functionality extras. I still don't get how extras
are different from additional packages.
I agree with Dan -- and add -1.
The extras are equivalent to almost identical additional packages.
If this makes reasoning more
Joseph Thomas (s) wrote at 2009-3-4 10:29 -0600:
We'd like to construct a zope login URL of the form on another server:
http://zope.domain:port/context/logged_in?__ac_name=uzz__ac_passwor
d=xxxsubmit=Log+in
where the ac_name and ac_password parameters are encrypted using zope
public key
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-3-5 11:28 +:
For one customer, I have a secondary storage server that copies repozo
backups, restores them and then runs fstest over the restored result
once every few hours.
(I'd like to move to zeoraid, but it's not quite there yet!)
On a few occasions
Allen Schmidt Sr. wrote at 2009-3-5 10:34 -0500:
Somehow, and not sure how, our session_data objects got deleted. No one
admits doing it so no idea what happened.
I recreated the objects with the same IDs and even setup the ZODB mount
point to point to the right parts. But our SESSION calls
Joseph Thomas (s) wrote at 2009-3-5 14:01 -0600:
Thanks, could you elaborate a bit, I'm somewhat new zope/plone:
I assume we'd need a shared key on both on ore j2ee server and zope
EVP (documented in the *nix man pages) supports both symmetical
as well as unsymmetrical encryption.
When you use
Chris McDonough wrote at 2009-3-2 12:11 -0500:
...
I'm pretty sure a steering group and a rebranding of existing software is not
going to make us more effective.
+ 1
Here's what I believe would make us more
effective:
- encouraging radical change for experimentation purposes, releasing folks
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-2-16 19:50 +0100:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 16.02.2009 19:43 Uhr, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-2-16 19:20 +0100:
...
Please come off it. Either become an active contributor and participate
in our dictatorship
I will never
Jens Vagelpohl wrote at 2009-2-16 20:43 +0100:
...
On Feb 16, 2009, at 19:43 , Dieter Maurer wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-2-16 19:20 +0100:
...
Please come off it. Either become an active contributor and
participate
in our dictatorship
I will never participate in your dictatorship
Zvezdan Petkovic wrote at 2009-2-19 13:06 -0500:
I can adapt to any style
and believe that the fine grain details should not be dogmatically
enforced but rather allow for variations in such subjective preferences.
+1
--
Dieter
___
Zope-Dev
Rowan Woodhouse wrote at 2009-2-17 21:36 +:
...
I'm having some trouble getting XML-RPC methods going on Zope2/Five.
I've got the following in my configure.zcml:
The Zope 3 xmlrpc implementation may not work with Zope2.
Zope2' xmlrpc implementation is incredibly hard (and broken):
it
Garito wrote at 2009-2-18 13:13 +0100:
I have a filesystem directory view that has 2 child folders
But when I switch to debug mode off the 2 folders disappears
Is this the normal FDV behaviour or I have any kind of problem?
No.
There should only be a single difference between debug and
deconya wrote at 2009-2-20 15:14 +0100:
Im new in this list and I need help for my first steps. Im received a server
with zope installed to administer 3 webs but one has the problem that fails
the configuration to establish the initial page.
I fear you need some background reading to understand
Tres Seaver wrote at 2009-2-15 10:45 -0500:
...
At the moment, the book is largely a guide to what can be done with Zope
TTW. DTML is still part of that store: it isn't gone, nor even
deprecated: its just that most core developers prefer not to use it in
most cases. Note that there is still no
Tres Seaver wrote at 2009-2-15 11:03 -0500:
...
I would rather make the case, explaining the tradeoffs, including the
fact that the consensus of the community is as you express, but then let
people make up their own minds.
+1
I hate the tendancy of quite a few Zope core developpers to dictate
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-2-16 19:20 +0100:
...
Please come off it. Either become an active contributor and participate
in our dictatorship
I will never participate in your dictatorship!
--
Dieter
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2009-2-8 14:14 +0100:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
I'ld rather not see a whole slew of extra packagse appear. I also wonder
how the extra number of packages and increasing size of sys.path
influence performance and restrictions on environments like GAE.
For environments
Jim Fulton wrote at 2009-2-8 13:00 -0500:
...
IMO, introducing an extra is like introducing a new package and in a
rather complicated way.
I agree with the first part of your sentence -- but cannot follow you
with the second part:
How can 'extra' : sequence of required distributions
be
Jim Fulton wrote at 2009-2-10 14:01 -0500:
On Feb 10, 2009, at 1:49 PM, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote at 2009-2-8 13:00 -0500:
...
IMO, introducing an extra is like introducing a new package and in a
rather complicated way.
I agree with the first part of your sentence -- but cannot
Christian Theune wrote at 2009-2-7 09:36 +0100:
...
According to the setuptools documentation and our experiments on the
sprint, this is supposed to work and does work:
When you declare a package to be a namespace package, it means that the
package has no meaningful contents in its __init__.py,
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-2-6 12:31 +:
...
I would find is very unintuitive when configuration were centralized
(in subpackages of zope.configuration) rather than modular.
Configuration belongs to the application or framework component
that depends on this configuration not to
Dan Korostelev wrote at 2009-2-6 14:10 +0300:
...
I still think we need to bug developers that they
need to upgrade their code with deprecation warnings, so we can
eventually remove old imports.
When you abuse deprecation warnings for minor cosmetic issues
you risk that deprecation warnings are
Morten W. Petersen wrote at 2009-2-2 18:23 +0100:
how does one go about in the configuration file to disable the
ZEO file-caching feature?
What is the ZEO file-caching feature?
When you mean the persistent ZEO client cache feature, then
ZODB/component.xml -- zeoclient tells you about all
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-1-30 18:50 +:
Brian Sutherland wrote:
zope.configuration.x
zope.configuration.y
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
Then setuptools needs fixing.
But not for this purpose:
I
Jean-Michel FRANCOIS wrote at 2009-1-28 16:56 +0100:
Is someone has try to use ZopeProfiler with KCacheGrind ? I would like
to try KCachegrind because i found xdot very slow.
I have started to read the code of ZopeProfiler and i have discovered
the world of profiling file format. It seems that
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-1-21 14:55 +0100:
...
TARGET=Python 2.6.X
ACCEPTABLE=Python 2.5
Python 2.4.X would be basically not acceptable but could be used
at your own risk using the --with-python option.
...
- - removing ZClasses completely
But hopefully provided by a separate
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-1-22 09:38 +:
...
One thing that myself and Shane talked briefly about on this list was
re-implementing the AST manipulation as dissallow-by-default filter
rather than a straight manipulation. That way, unexpected stuff should
be allowed by default.
The terms
Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2009-1-23 19:36 +0100:
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Tres Seaver wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
- removing ZClasses completely
This is done now.
Wow. This was quick!
Much quicker than fixing bugs reported in the collector :-(
--
Dieter
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-1-25 10:21 +0100:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 25.01.2009 9:27 Uhr, Dieter Maurer wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-1-21 14:55 +0100:
...
TARGET=Python 2.6.X
ACCEPTABLE=Python 2.5
Python 2.4.X would be basically not acceptable but could
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-1-25 12:53 +0100:
...
- removing ZClasses completely
This is done now.
Wow. This was quick!
Much quicker than fixing bugs reported in the collector :-(
Please stop bitching and fix your favorite bugs in the collector.
You have svn commit right *wink*
I will
Martijn Pieters wrote at 2009-1-25 13:29 +0100:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 12:56, Dieter Maurer die...@handshake.de wrote:
I plan to provide such a package as dm.ZClasses or (maybe) Zope2.ZClasses
-- of course with some complaints against the Zope release management
in the documentation
Andreas Jung wrote at 2009-1-25 20:19 +0100:
...
Please stop the discussion. The majority of Zope developers considers
the ZClasses programming model as not up2date and not flexible enough
when it comes to extensibility and scalability.
That's why we don't want
ZClasses being part of Zope 2
Roger Ineichen wrote at 2009-1-18 13:04 +0100:
...
IMHO, it is not an anti-pattern:
We have a global site why should we not have a global request?
When Zope is used as a Web Application Server, it is quite
natural to expect a request.
I'm fine with the zope.globalrequest
1 - 100 of 2947 matches
Mail list logo
