Re: [Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
Tres Seaver wrote at 2009-2-14 20:31 -0500: ... For all its flaws, setuptools fixes a lot of what is horribly broken in distutils: most of the flaws arise from the choice to stay pseudo-compatible with distutils, and reuse it, rather than starting from scratch. But the dependancy handling is obviously introduced by setuptools. -- Dieter ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
Hanno Schlichting wrote: If a package only depends on Acquisition, DateTime and zope.* packages it does no longer depend on Zope2. I'd like to encourage people to look at their real dependency and be honest about those. Especially looking at things from the perspective of: why does my package have a Zope2 dependency instead of I use this inside Zope2, so let's specify Zope2. The later information is where a classifier of Framework::Zope2 is appropriate, the former is not. Damn, too late. I meant: Only add a install_requires=['Zope2'] if you really have a dependency on the Zope2 package. Never ever make the mistake of doing the lazy thing and mistaking it for a I work with Zope2. The expression of working with or intended for is what the classifiers are for. Hanno ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
Am 12.02.2009 um 14:45 schrieb yuppie: install_requires=[ 'setuptools', 'Zope2 = 2.12.dev', ], Is that the right way to resolve that issue? Could it cause any trouble if I would check in that change? Only for someone wishing to use it totally outside of a Zope context. I'm not that familiar with Buildout but I would have thought that any direct import dependencies should be listed - and zope.location doesn't seem to be (neither are zope.event or zope.site for that matter). OTOH the condition = seems to be being incorrectly interpreted. If this is a bug then it should be filed. Charlie -- Charlie Clark Helmholtzstr. 20 Düsseldorf D- 40215 Tel: +49-211-938-5360 GSM: +49-178-782-6226 ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
Charlie Clark wrote at 2009-2-14 16:22 +0100: ... I'm not that familiar with Buildout but I would have thought that any direct import dependencies should be listed - and zope.location doesn't seem to be (neither are zope.event or zope.site for that matter). OTOH the condition = seems to be being incorrectly interpreted. If this is a bug then it should be filed. You are right, but unfortunately this is quite a deep problem in setuptools. setuptools does not determine the complete dependancy graph and then looks for a global solution to the set of restrictions. Instead it satisfies restrictions incrementally thereby committing some versions -- and may later find that they conflict with other requirements. -- Dieter ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Charlie Clark wrote: Am 12.02.2009 um 14:45 schrieb yuppie: install_requires=[ 'setuptools', 'Zope2 = 2.12.dev', ], Is that the right way to resolve that issue? Could it cause any trouble if I would check in that change? Only for someone wishing to use it totally outside of a Zope context. Given that package's job in life, I strongly doubt that we need to worry about anybody using it outside of a Zope2 app. In fact, I think it might be a good idea just to fold the package back into Zope2 (I don't recall why it ever shipped separately). I'm not that familiar with Buildout but I would have thought that any direct import dependencies should be listed - and zope.location doesn't seem to be (neither are zope.event or zope.site for that matter). OTOH the condition = seems to be being incorrectly interpreted. If this is a bug then it should be filed. The transitive dependencies of another dependency don't need to be listed: the problem Yuppie was fixing was a set of over-specific dependencies, now redundant in the new, egg-centric world of Zope 2.12. I think another fix would be to move the Zope2 import to the top of the list, so that its own, more specific dependencies would be installed first: however, I don't see much win over Yuppie's fix. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJlxyD+gerLs4ltQ4RAnMhAKCVNpXav5TpO17EQDJKPeIE/JLC1wCfVzWY maFcuCWJJY09WMDwxsYz4G4= =wJCe -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
Am 14.02.2009 um 20:33 schrieb Tres Seaver: Given that package's job in life, I strongly doubt that we need to worry about anybody using it outside of a Zope2 app. In fact, I think it might be a good idea just to fold the package back into Zope2 (I don't recall why it ever shipped separately). If it is Zope2 specific then it should be part of Zope2: it's monolithic but we love it anyway. I'm not that familiar with Buildout but I would have thought that any direct import dependencies should be listed - and zope.location doesn't seem to be (neither are zope.event or zope.site for that matter). OTOH the condition = seems to be being incorrectly interpreted. If this is a bug then it should be filed. The transitive dependencies of another dependency don't need to be listed: the problem Yuppie was fixing was a set of over-specific dependencies, now redundant in the new, egg-centric world of Zope 2.12. I think another fix would be to move the Zope2 import to the top of the list, so that its own, more specific dependencies would be installed first: however, I don't see much win over Yuppie's fix. Yuppie's suggestion is fine with me and probably the second solution best solution aside from just making it part of Zope2. But that doesn't stop a bug being a bug. Dieter suggests that the bug is with setuptools which gives it plenty of company. as far as I know. Life used to be so simple with just distutils ;-) Charlie -- Charlie Clark Helmholtzstr. 20 Düsseldorf D- 40215 Tel: +49-211-938-5360 GSM: +49-178-782-6226 ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Charlie Clark wrote: Am 14.02.2009 um 20:33 schrieb Tres Seaver: Given that package's job in life, I strongly doubt that we need to worry about anybody using it outside of a Zope2 app. In fact, I think it might be a good idea just to fold the package back into Zope2 (I don't recall why it ever shipped separately). If it is Zope2 specific then it should be part of Zope2: it's monolithic but we love it anyway. I'm not that familiar with Buildout but I would have thought that any direct import dependencies should be listed - and zope.location doesn't seem to be (neither are zope.event or zope.site for that matter). OTOH the condition = seems to be being incorrectly interpreted. If this is a bug then it should be filed. The transitive dependencies of another dependency don't need to be listed: the problem Yuppie was fixing was a set of over-specific dependencies, now redundant in the new, egg-centric world of Zope 2.12. I think another fix would be to move the Zope2 import to the top of the list, so that its own, more specific dependencies would be installed first: however, I don't see much win over Yuppie's fix. Yuppie's suggestion is fine with me and probably the second solution best solution aside from just making it part of Zope2. But that doesn't stop a bug being a bug. Dieter suggests that the bug is with setuptools which gives it plenty of company. as far as I know. Life used to be so simple with just distutils ;-) LOFL. Sure, back in the day..., You kids get off my lawn!, etc. For all its flaws, setuptools fixes a lot of what is horribly broken in distutils: most of the flaws arise from the choice to stay pseudo-compatible with distutils, and reuse it, rather than starting from scratch. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJl3Bg+gerLs4ltQ4RAnnNAJ9MLRXchbp2T2JEb8Kt6XAQuEu+igCgnZXD TtCtJw2kVgeQUmKO6AwIq0Y= =Kzxx -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
[Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
Hi! I have some trouble using five.localsitemanager in a buildout with Zope2 2.12.dev. This is the error I get: Error: There is a version conflict. We already have: zope.location 3.5.3 but Zope2 2.12.dev requires 'zope.location==3.5.2'. The setup.py of five.localsitemanager specifies these dependencies: install_requires=[ 'setuptools', 'zope.component = 3.5.0', 'zope.container', 'zope.event', 'zope.interface', 'zope.location = 3.5.0', 'zope.site = 3.6.0', 'zope.traversing', 'Acquisition', 'Zope2', 'ZODB3', ], If I remove the dependencies that are also part of the Zope2 2.12.dev dependencies everything works fine: install_requires=[ 'setuptools', 'Zope2 = 2.12.dev', ], Is that the right way to resolve that issue? Could it cause any trouble if I would check in that change? Cheers, Yuppie ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
Re: [Zope-CMF] [dev] five.localsitemanager: dependencies
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: Hi! I have some trouble using five.localsitemanager in a buildout with Zope2 2.12.dev. This is the error I get: Error: There is a version conflict. We already have: zope.location 3.5.3 but Zope2 2.12.dev requires 'zope.location==3.5.2'. The setup.py of five.localsitemanager specifies these dependencies: install_requires=[ 'setuptools', 'zope.component = 3.5.0', 'zope.container', 'zope.event', 'zope.interface', 'zope.location = 3.5.0', 'zope.site = 3.6.0', 'zope.traversing', 'Acquisition', 'Zope2', 'ZODB3', ], If I remove the dependencies that are also part of the Zope2 2.12.dev dependencies everything works fine: install_requires=[ 'setuptools', 'Zope2 = 2.12.dev', ], Is that the right way to resolve that issue? Could it cause any trouble if I would check in that change? +1. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJlKfT+gerLs4ltQ4RAgZFAJ0ZNyJFpo9WvxO5Vcf9JgXY0blg1QCfUgRL qA7WkCZrozsOzpL1LioB5RE= =grhc -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope-cmf/ for bug reports and feature requests
