Chris McDonough wrote at 2003-3-11 15:32 -0500:
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 15:22, Guido van Rossum wrote:
That's why we're including the correct versions of ZODB and ZEO in
Zope itself. That's already the case in Zope 2.6.
Zope 2.6 doesn't yet include ZEO, at least I don't think it
On Tuesday 11 March 2003 10:48 pm, Jamie Heilman wrote:
You'd probably still want a single master config file for the whole
thing, and a tool to check the configuration is valid separate from
the process that uses the file to configure itself.
Not I. Large applications with a master
Toby Dickenson wrote:
There is no amount of reconfiguration that can improve this in Zope2. Zope3
promises to fix this, but with modular python components rather than modular
unix components. I would be interested in your thoughts on whether this makes
a difference.
I don't think modular
The point I'm trying to make is that Zope has learned nothing from the
UNIX philosophy. Yes, you can extend the config schema. You can grow
new, better config files, of extraordinary magnitude. The
all-powerful server will grow from being all-powerful to being
all-powerful + n. It will be
But lo, still you won't be able to do something as
mundane as limit the memory the FTP server is able to consume without
affecting the HTTP server.
You can do this with Zope. Just use ZEO and run one ZEO front-end for
HTTP and one for FTP.
--
Steve Alexander
I'm not dismissing it, and I think you need to go back and read what I
wrote again very very carefully without reading anything into it. I'm
not trying to imply that using environment variables to configure the
current codebase will reduce the code footprint. Even if it did,
because of the
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 15:22, Guido van Rossum wrote:
That's why we're including the correct versions of ZODB and ZEO in
Zope itself. That's already the case in Zope 2.6.
Zope 2.6 doesn't yet include ZEO, at least I don't think it does. ;-)
Oops, I stand corrected. But Zope 2.7 does
--On Tuesday, March 11, 2003 03:43:33 PM -0500 Guido van Rossum
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 15:22, Guido van Rossum wrote:
That's why we're including the correct versions of ZODB and ZEO in
Zope itself. That's already the case in Zope 2.6.
Zope 2.6 doesn't yet include ZEO,
Oops, I stand corrected. But Zope 2.7 does include ZEO!
Very good! But in that case, shouldn't the new Zope 2.7 install and
startup stuff support it?
Well, in a typical installation, you won't be running ZEO on the same
machine as Zope, right? ZEO has its own install and config stuff,
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 16:12, Dan L. Pierson wrote:
Very good! But in that case, shouldn't the new Zope 2.7 install and
startup stuff support it?
It does. It's just that the default setup is still to use a non-ZEOd
FileStorage for your main database. But you can change options in the
config
Very good! But in that case, shouldn't the new Zope 2.7 install and
startup stuff support it?
It does. It's just that the default setup is still to use a non-ZEOd
FileStorage for your main database. But you can change options in the
config file to make it use a ZEO ClientStorage.
Cool! I didn't know.
Do you think we should tell people that if they want to run a ZEO server
to just run mkzeoinst from the software home resulting from Zope's make
install and to edit zope.conf to use a ClientStorage?
Chris, have you looked at ZEO/mkzeoinst.py? It uses a somewhat
simpler
Chris, have you looked at ZEO/mkzeoinst.py? It uses a somewhat
simpler approach than the new Zope setup, but it creates a zeoctl
script and a zeo.conf configuration file.
Cool! I didn't know.
Do you think we should tell people that if they want to run a ZEO server
to just run
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 04:25:09PM -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Oops, I stand corrected. But Zope 2.7 does include ZEO!
Very good! But in that case, shouldn't the new Zope 2.7 install and
startup stuff support it?
Well, in a typical installation, you won't be running ZEO on the
Steve Alexander wrote:
But lo, still you won't be able to do something as
mundane as limit the memory the FTP server is able to consume without
affecting the HTTP server.
You can do this with Zope. Just use ZEO and run one ZEO front-end for
HTTP and one for FTP.
Sure, but then you carry
Jeremy Hylton wrote:
I don't know what work means in this context, but think the ZConfig
project is thorough. In my checkout there are 180k of document, 180k of
unit tests, and 136k of code. A measure of work that suggests that
something with 0k of documentation and tests and 136k of code
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 17:48, Jamie Heilman wrote:
How about, a lot of code/documentation was removed, and a lot of new
code/documentation was added. Don't get hung up on the exact
numbers, my point was, a lot of work has gone into simplifying the
configuration process, but that the bigger
Chris McDonough wrote:
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 17:48, Jamie Heilman wrote:
How about, a lot of code/documentation was removed, and a lot of new
code/documentation was added. Don't get hung up on the exact
numbers, my point was, a lot of work has gone into simplifying the
configuration
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 10:01:53AM -0500, Dan L. Pierson wrote:
I don't see an equivalent to ./zctl.py debug anywhere. This starts up an
interactive Python as
a ZEO client with ZServer and Zope imported and app = Zope.app(). I use it
constantly. Please?
+1. I also use zctl.py debug
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 10:31:13PM -0500, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote:
Detaching, or daemonizing, will be a separate configuration
parameter from everything else.
great, that is exactly what i really want.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
Look! Up in the sky! It's GARGANTUAN SKULL OF THE
On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 19:51, Jamie Heilman wrote:
- Environment variables are no longer used for configuration.
I'll say it one more time.
The roadmap[1] states under the Simplifying the Zope experience
section:
* simple tasks should be simple!
Now, code required to extract a
Chris McDonough wrote:
Before dismissing it out of hand, I'd encourage you to try it out.
I'm not dismissing it, and I think you need to go back and read what I
wrote again very very carefully without reading anything into it. I'm
not trying to imply that using environment variables to
On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 21:42, Jamie Heilman wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
The point I'm trying to make is that Zope has learned nothing from the
UNIX philosophy. Yes, you can extend the config schema. You can grow
new, better config files, of extraordinary magnitude. The
all-powerful server
On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 17:07, Paul Winkler wrote:
A few questions / concerns listed below, otherwise it looks
fine to me...
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 04:41:48PM -0500, Chris McDonough wrote:
debug mode
does this still toggle a whole bunch of things?
production installation (on/off)
Edward Muller writes:
Actually I like the way z2.py detaches or doesn't detach. Perhaps a
separate config option would be good to control this.
Detaching, or daemonizing, will be a separate configuration
parameter from everything else. The basic mechanism will be that
provided by the
25 matches
Mail list logo
