Tres Seaver wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> David Glick wrote:
>> Log message for revision 109667:
>>add a failing test for a regression in parsing ISO format datetimes from
>> DateTime 2.10, as discussed at http://dev.plone.org/plone/ticket/10140
>> ...note that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Glick wrote:
> Log message for revision 109667:
> add a failing test for a regression in parsing ISO format datetimes from
> DateTime 2.10, as discussed at http://dev.plone.org/plone/ticket/10140
> ...note that this will give a false positive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christian Theune wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 04:13 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
>>> * 2010-03-03 21:44, Jim Fulton wrote:
The ZTK was created in part to deal with instability issues arising from
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have a failing test in plone.app.dexterity 1.0a7. This is simply
> trying to compare two dates:
>
> >>> from DateTime import DateTime
> >>> DateTime() > DateTime(md.CreationDate())
> True
>
> At leas
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
...
> 2b: ensuring ongoing compatibility of the trunks
>
> In addition I wonder how the various trunk versions of ZTK packages
> should relate to each other. Should they always build? Should we accept
> breakage of all trunks with each other
Hi,
as promised I'm currently trying to write down the instructions for
running ZTK tests. I need some feedback on our process.
I figured there are various scenarios for which we have tools:
1. Ensure that a branch of the ZTK stays in working order
For that the ZTK has test runners created by
Hi,
I took Tres' quick explanation of how the daily 'Zope tests: 6 OK' is
created and put the instruction into the ZTK documentation for automated
build systems:
http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html
*I* encourage everyone who runs recurring/regular checks of any kind
that ensur
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Thu Mar 4 12:00:00 2010 UTC to Fri Mar 5 12:00:00 2010 UTC.
There were 6 messages: 6 from Zope Tests.
Tests passed OK
---
Subject: OK : Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Thu Mar 4 20:37:17 EST 2010
URL: http://
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 04:10:29PM -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
> After successfully configuring the Hudson[1] continuous integration
> server yesterday to test the various repoze.* packages[2], I thought I
> would experiment with using it to drive the compatibility tests for ZTK
> and zopeapp. Here
On 05.03.10 11:10, Andreas Zeidler wrote:
> >>> now == DateTime(now.ISO8601())
> False
> >>> now.ISO8601()
> '2010-03-05T11:06:09+01:00'
>
> unlike stated in `DateTime.interfaces` the string returned `ISO8601`
> method does not contain the time zone.
oops, it does, of course (i think i'm
On 05.03.10 10:53, Andreas Zeidler wrote:
> also, look at the following (using `DateTime` 2.12):
>
> $ ~/plone/coredev/branches/4.0/bin/zopepy
> >>> from DateTime import DateTime
> >>> now = DateTime()
> >>> now == DateTime(now)
> True
> >>> now == DateTime(now.ISO())
> False
>
> th
Hi,
On 03/04/2010 10:44 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
Weird. Tres' mail didn't make it into gmane ... I'll fold my replies to
Jim and Tres into this one mail. (Looks like I'm now turning into the
one making noise here. I'm already sorry for people hav
On 03/04/2010 04:13 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
>> * 2010-03-03 21:44, Jim Fulton wrote:
>>> The ZTK was created in part to deal with instability issues arising from
>>> people working on parts without testing the whole.
>>
>> I suppose everybo
On 11.01.10 01:47, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Laurence Rowe wrote:
>> I believe the current behaviour is intentional to preserve backwards
>> compatibility. See the discussion starting here:
>> https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2007-October/030042.html
>>
>> Maybe it was 'fixed' on 2.10 branch s
On 03/04/2010 11:08 PM, Ross Patterson wrote:
> Hermann Himmelbauer writes:
>
>> Hi,
>> For quite some time I see messages like this in my z3.log:
>>
>> 2010-03-02T16:27:14 WARNING ZopePublication Competing writes/reads
>> at /BSPSite/act/++vh++http:zis.act.at:80/bankneu/++/images/sponsor_logo.p
Hi,
I also looked at Hudson a few days ago and found it to be awesome. :)
On 03/04/2010 10:10 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
> After successfully configuring the Hudson[1] continuous integration
> server yesterday to test the various repoze.* packages[2], I thought I
> would experiment with using it to d
Hi,
On 03/05/2010 02:56 AM, Baiju M wrote:
> Hi Sebastien,
>
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 1:47 AM, Sebastien Douche wrote:
>>> The current state of nightly builds is a bit untidy. According to
>>> http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html there's four
>>> buildbot
>>> installations wi
Hi,
On 03/04/2010 09:17 PM, Sebastien Douche wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 17:32, Christian Theune wrote:
>> here's my first shot at a summary of today's meeting. I found the
>> meeting itself very positive and energetic - thanks again to everyone
>> who joined.
>
>> The current state of night
On 03/04/2010 11:35 AM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 7:19 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
>> A thought that came up when reading this paragraph: another option
>> restructuring/grouping to reduce the amount of packages may be to join
>> smaller packages with weird boundaries into
19 matches
Mail list logo
