Re: [Zope-dev] product import question
Eric Roby wrote:
I attempted to restrict the meta_types in the class that is represented by
dbFolder to just prodA. In order to gain access to the prodA add form, I
had to import the prodA module into the prodB module and make the assignment
in the class that is represented by dbFolder. At this point the single
factory method was exposed in the dbFolder as expected. Unfortuantely, the
constructor for prodA (action of the prodA add form) could not be found.
With numerous tweakings and source searching I settled on duplicating the
constructor function for prodA in the class that is represented by dbFolder.
Now it works.
You need to import the constructor methods and the assing them to local
constructor methods.
I use something similar in my simpleProduct where I have a base module
called mxmSimpleItem which has 2 constructors:
mxmSimpleItem.py
manage_addForm = HTMLFile('manage_addForm', globals())
def manage_addAction(self, id=None, REQUEST=None):
some code
I then have another module mxmObjectManager which is similar to the
first. So I also need the constructor in the module. Had they only been
in the class, it would not have been a problem. But I just import them
and assign them like:
mxmObjectManager.py
import mxmSimpleItem
manage_addForm = mxmSimpleItem.manage_addForm
manage_addAction = mxmSimpleItem.manage_addAction
Which is the right way to do it.
regards Max M
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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] Proposed installation changes for review
Adrian van den Dries writes: Debug mode needs to be broken out into directives for its real effects. I always want Zope to run as a daemon, but I also want automatic PT/DTML reloading, and immediate tracebacks. I think there should be a separate no-detach for those people who want that feature. I'm happy with this (more so than the single option). I think it's fair for us to get this implemented before we're done; not sure if it has to happen before the merge (I'm mostly tied up this week). The no-detach choice is already separate -- this is now an option to the separate zopectl program. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope] Proposed installation changes for review
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 00:24, Edward Muller wrote: Once zope is installed in /opt/zope-2.7.0 can it be moved without damaging the install say to /home/virtual/some.host.name/opt/zope-2.7.0 ? Yes. Its location is only meaningful to the instance files that need to find it. In our hosting setup some things get run in a chroot, some things can't... Currently zope get's installed in a chroot environment for anyone who wants a zope install. It must be a complete install since when the user restarts it he will be in his chroot environment. So I'd ideally like to install zope in a way where all of the core of zope is in one place ... say ... /opt/zope/version # (/opt/zope/2.7.0, /opt/zope/2.7.1, etc...) This I can hardlink/symlink into each chroot and make permissions 755 root/root. I think this will work. The only thing that might be a little weird is tracebacks generated by pyc files, as they may report the filenames of the Python modules where they were originally installed, instead of where they live now. There is some contention about whether this happens under Python 2.2, but I know it's true for Python 2.1 and prior. From there I would like to be able to install an 'instance', which is ... in my case meaning the data.fs, /Products directory, log files, etc, etc. The stuff that make this users instance theirs. When the install is happening, the script executing it would most likely be outside of the chroot ... but I guess it could be configured to chroot as well.. You would need to chroot the run of makeinstance currently as it encodes paths to software within the instance files that start Zope. So if you ran it outside the chroot it would work, but when the user logged in to the chroot, the paths to the software would be wrong. I think this might be made configurable with a switch to mkzopeinstance (--sw_location=/some/path), though. I will add this to the tentative TODO, thanks. I already have start/stop scripts to go through the users that have a zope install and chroot into that users 'host' and then start zope as that 'hosts' administrative user. These scripts will unfortunately need to change for Zope 2.7 unless we create some sort of backwards compatibilty layer for startup. - C ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] PyOpenGL support?
Hello all, I've spent the last couple of days going through the Zope docs, mail archives, and even googling, but I can't find a lot of information on using PyOpenGL with Zope. I've found a message from Anthony Pfrunder, dated July 1999: Within the next few weeks I'll be releasing an extension patch to allow the use of the Python Imaging Library and OpenGL with Zope. And a blurb about PyOpenGL in Zope Newbie News, Jan 2001: http://weblogs.userland.com/zopeNewbies/2001/01/24 It just mentions its release but nothing about Zope. So, has been done before? And if so, is there some documentation/guide on getting it work? Thanks! -- Edward Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] ZopeSecurityPolicy
Hi, I had some conversation with Tres about the SecurityPolicy implementation. I would like to clean up following problem: The method validate is not very clear about when it will raise an exception and when it will return a boolean. This results in code that expects it to return a boolean, and makes conclusions about exceptions that are wrong by catching the anonymously, transforming them all (e.g. AttributeError) into Unauthorized. This shadows the real source of a problem, also the code that calls validate probably shouldn't raise Unauthorized on it's own. But there's where my problem starts: could we get it somewhat clear who should raise Unauthorized, what can be expected from validate and where should only boolean values be returned? I would like to see some discussion, wrap it up in a proposal, and deliver the code on a branch. Thanks for listening, Christian -- Christian Theune, gocept gmbh co.kg phone: +49-3641-233526 mobile: +49-179-7808366 mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] LOTS of roles?
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you write: Note that you'll also want to change validate() if you go that route. It has a short-circuited version of getRolesInContext in it. are you sure it's not BasicUser.allowed() that you mean? there's a comment in there about checking roles manaully rather than with getRolesInContext... Yeah I'm sorry, I meant allowed(). You could also check what NuxUserGroups does, it has to patch this same area to provide a notion of groups to the security machinery. Note that I don't remember your exact use cases, but NuxUserGroups could be useful to you. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) +33 1 40 33 79 87 http://nuxeo.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 able to read mail. Its heralds shall sit upon mountain high throwns hewn of the finest O'Reilly and New Riders scripture. 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. Fracture the server infrastructure into small, seperate processes. The configuration of the individual pieces becomes trivial. The understanding of the overall data flow improves. When there's nothing left to remove from code, you've won. Some of the breaks have already been made, like the separation of the storage from its front-end. Thats good, we need more action along those lines. You're barking up the wrong tree. Zope 2 won't change. Zope 3 is still in a state of flux, and that's where you should aim your speech. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 distributed nature of the technique, its damnedly hard to maintain in a project as large as Zope. Also, I didn't say ZConfig was 374k of code, I said it was 374k of *work*. I chose that word very carefully, and obviously thats going to err on the side of conservatism as certainly the work was not isolated to that single directory tree. 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 would be better makes no sense to me. 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 I don't see where the UNIX philosophy has anything useful to say about configuration, but maybe I'm just a closet unix hater 0.5 wink. 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 able to read mail. Its heralds shall sit upon mountain high throwns hewn of the finest O'Reilly and New Riders scripture. 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. Fracture the server infrastructure into small, seperate processes. The configuration of the individual pieces becomes trivial. The understanding of the overall data flow improves. When there's nothing left to remove from code, you've won. Some of the breaks have already been made, like the separation of the storage from its front-end. Thats good, we need more action along those lines. I don't see that configuration gets any easier if you have multiple processes. Even if Zope had N processes, there would still be the same amount of stuff to configure. 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. As I watched everyone working on the ZConfig project, I was impressed with how many issues are involved in getting a decent configuration system. I don't think that break the server into multiple pieces would make it easier to configure, and I don't see what requirements could have been eliminated to make the project take less work. Jeremy ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] PyOpenGL support?
I've spent the last couple of days going through the Zope docs, mail archives, and even googling, but I can't find a lot of information on using PyOpenGL with Zope. I've found a message from Anthony Pfrunder, dated July 1999: Within the next few weeks I'll be releasing an extension patch to allow the use of the Python Imaging Library and OpenGL with Zope. And a blurb about PyOpenGL in Zope Newbie News, Jan 2001: http://weblogs.userland.com/zopeNewbies/2001/01/24 It just mentions its release but nothing about Zope. So, has been done before? And if so, is there some documentation/guide on getting it work? Dunno, but what sort of integration are you expecting? Most things that work in any Python app (with the proper versions) can be made to work with Zope without too much trouble. Whether someone's made a Product around it is a different story. (Probably not, in this case.) --jcc ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 include ZEO! --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
--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, at least I don't think it does. ;-) 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? ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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, which is very similar to that for Zope, but ZEO is not installed as part of the main Zope install. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 file to make it use a ZEO ClientStorage. This is in lieu of of requiring you to edit custom_zodb.py as you needed to do in 2.6 and prior. It's clear that the Zope source distro should support the use of ClientStorage out of the box. It's not however so clear that the Zope source distro should make it to set up a ZEO server (although it does happen to include the necessary files to run a ZEO server too, it doesn't include a 'zeoctl' or a zeo.conf, etc). That's not to say that it shouldn't be easy to set up a ZEO server, but that making it easy should probably the job of a package other than Zope proper. The right thing to do would be to package up a ZEO server installer separate from Zope 2.7 with a similar kind of buildout, support files, and configuration file. At least that's been my idea so far. - C ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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. This is in lieu of of requiring you to edit custom_zodb.py as you needed to do in 2.6 and prior. It's clear that the Zope source distro should support the use of ClientStorage out of the box. It's not however so clear that the Zope source distro should make it to set up a ZEO server (although it does happen to include the necessary files to run a ZEO server too, it doesn't include a 'zeoctl' or a zeo.conf, etc). 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. That's not to say that it shouldn't be easy to set up a ZEO server, but that making it easy should probably the job of a package other than Zope proper. The right thing to do would be to package up a ZEO server installer separate from Zope 2.7 with a similar kind of buildout, support files, and configuration file. At least that's been my idea so far. Not needed; it's all there (though far simpler in approach than the Zope installer). --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 approach than the new Zope setup, but it creates a zeoctl script and a zeo.conf configuration file. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: [Zope] Re: Proposed installation changes for review
Guido van Rossum wrote: 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, which is very similar to that for Zope, but ZEO is not installed as part of the main Zope install. I routinely run ZEO on all of my sites, on the same machine. I don't gain any scalability benefits this way, but it is fantastic for debugging and tweaking a live site. My creaky old zctl.py auto-starts ZEO when necessary, using the same configuration data as it uses for the associated Zope instance, so they both know to use 'var/zeo.soc' to connect. Cheers, Evan @ 4-am ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proposed installation changes for review
- Original Message - From: Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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? hm... I wonder if this wold be a common case if ZEO was included as a integral part of Zope. I may be wrong, bur aren't there benefits of running ZEO even on a single machine (i.e. stability and/or redundancy)? I know I allready now could need the functionality of ZEO on a single machine (and I am about to use ZEO as soon as I fix some non-ZEO-able issues in our app). ZEO has its own install and config stuff, which is very similar to that for Zope, but ZEO is not installed as part of the main Zope install. I thought you had to install ZEO on top/inside of an existing Zope installation. Will this be different in Zope 2.7? Thanks, /dario - Dario Lopez-Ksten, IT Systems Services Chalmers University of Tech. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 mkzeoinst from the software home resulting from Zope's make install and to edit zope.conf to use a ClientStorage? That should work, yes, as long as mkzeoinst.py, zdctl.py, zdrun.py and runzeo.py are all on $PATH at that point. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: [Zope] Re: Proposed installation changes for review
I routinely run ZEO on all of my sites, on the same machine. I don't gain any scalability benefits this way, but it is fantastic for debugging and tweaking a live site. My creaky old zctl.py auto-starts ZEO when necessary, using the same configuration data as it uses for the associated Zope instance, so they both know to use 'var/zeo.soc' to connect. zdrun takes care of auto-restart. Sharing config data may be a little trickier; Fred and/or Chris should know more about that. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proposed installation changes for review
I thought you had to install ZEO on top/inside of an existing Zope installation. Will this be different in Zope 2.7? Yes, ZEO will be an integral part of Zope then. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 same machine as Zope, right? ZEO has its own install and config stuff, which is very similar to that for Zope, but ZEO is not installed as part of the main Zope install. i suppose it's not typical but we run zeo on all our systems including the dev boxes, because * we like to have the same environment everywhere for sanity's sake * interactive debugging is very cool and has saved my butt more than once. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com Look! Up in the sky! It's FAT BOY! (random hero from isometric.spaceninja.com) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proposed installation changes for review
Chris McDonough wrote at 2003-3-10 16:41 -0500: ... - Configuration is normally done by editing a config file instead of passing command line options. The configuration file is handled by the ZConfig package. - Environment variables are no longer used for configuration. I am *very* sad about this. Configuration via environment variables is easy and much more flexible than configuration files: We use a single configuration for a farm of Zopes. Of course, each Zope needs its own ZEO client cache, its own log file, its own pid files, All this is achieved by incorporating the result of hostname into the respective environment variables. I do not know how to do something like this in a configuration file (unless it provides for some form of shell functionality). Howfully, the configuration file supports (at least) definition of key constants (like hostname) and its interpolation in other modular (and reusable) components. - Building and installing the software have become more clearly distinct; the installation can be separate from the build. Seems you make the elementary installation more difficult. Advanced installations may get easier, though... Dieter ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proposed installation changes for review
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 17:11, Dieter Maurer wrote:
All this is achieved by incorporating the result of hostname
into the respective environment variables.
I do not know how to do something like this in a configuration
file (unless it provides for some form of shell functionality).
ZConfig does allow you to declare and use simple bash-style variables
within a single file, but currently provides no access to the
environment. I suspect we could add something to obtain an envvar value
within ZConfig.
E.g.:
%define HOSTNAME ${HOSTNAME}
.. then refer to $HOSTNAME in the rest of the config file...
(squiggly brackets would mean obtain from environment).
Do you think this would suffice? Or maybe we just make HOSTNAME and/or
IP_ADRRESS within the a key constant as you describe.
- Building and installing the software have become more clearly
distinct; the installation can be separate from the build.
Seems you make the elementary installation more difficult.
I'm surprised at this assertion. The most elementary way of install
under 2.7 is this:
$ cd Zope-src
$ ./configure
{finds suitable Python and reports lack of large file support}
$ make
$ make install
$ /opt/zope/mkzopeinstance /tmp/inst
{user edits /tmp/inst/etc/zope.conf, which has inline docs}
$ /tmp/inst/zopectl start
While under 2.6 it's this:
{need to know to configure Python with largefile support}
$ cd Zope-src
$ /path/to/python/version/you/want wo_pcgi.py
{user finds and reads doc/ENVIRONMENT.txt for envvars}
{user finds and reads z2.py for command-line switches}
{user edits the 'start' script with the right switches and envvars}
$ ./start
(Forgot to mention the auto-large-file-detection support in the
configure script in the original request for comments, sorry).
I think most folks new to Zope would pick up on the first path sooner
than the latter as it more closely follows the setup directions of
programs they're already used to (Apache, for instance).
It also provides the least amount of suprise in the long term. For
example, how many times have we had to talk panicked people through a
recovery effort after they've run in to the 2GB limit on some UNIX
variant because they're running a Python without largefile support?
Anyway, I think the requirement to be able to access the environment
under ZConfig is a good suggestion. If you could expand on why you
think elementary installation is now harder, I would like to hear that.
- C
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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] ZopeSecurityPolicy
Christian Theune wrote at 2003-3-11 17:11 +0100: The method validate is not very clear about when it will raise an exception and when it will return a boolean. This results in code that expects it to return a boolean, and makes conclusions about exceptions that are wrong by catching the anonymously, transforming them all (e.g. AttributeError) into Unauthorized. This shadows the real source of a problem, also the code that calls validate probably shouldn't raise Unauthorized on it's own. But there's where my problem starts: could we get it somewhat clear who should raise Unauthorized, what can be expected from validate and where should only boolean values be returned? In my view, validate should return true or false and never raise Unauthorized. At the places where validate is used in an immediate access check, the caller raises Unauthorized when validate returns false. The opposite is almost as acceptable: validate returns None (if access is granted) or raises Unauthorized otherwise. Callers that only want to check but not access can catch the exception. The current behaviour where access denied is sometimes represented as false and sometimes as Unauthorized is not optimal. Dieter ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Zope Template Newbie question
I'm trying to pull in another file with the following markup: span tal:replace=here/level2bannerLevel2banner content goes here/span And it does pull the file in, but it quotes the entire HTML in that file so that my browser doesn't interpret it: lt;img src=/images/page2leftbottom-blank.jpg width=331 height=39 border=0 class=banner alt=Categorygt; This is not what I want. What am I doing wrong, or how to I prevent the quoting? David Cain Senior Web Developer, Information Systems Department Syracuse University Library Syracuse, New York 13244-2010 (315) 443-5923 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Zope Template Newbie question
On March 11, David Cain wrote: And it does pull the file in, but it quotes the entire HTML in that file so that my browser doesn't interpret it: http://www.zope.org/Documentation/Books/ZopeBook/2_6Edition/AdvZPT.stx Normally, the tal:replace and tal:content statements quote HTML tags and entities in the text that they insert. For instance, the the character is quoted to amp;lt;. If you actually want to insert unquoted text, you need to precede the expression with the structure keyword. a. -- Adrian van den Dries [EMAIL PROTECTED] Development team www.dev.flow.com.au FLOW Communications Pty. Ltd. www.flow.com.au ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Pydoc and Zope
Hi! I've used Pydoc with Dieter Maurer's patches to browse the Zope sourcecode before. These patches are quite old and probably incompatible with current Zope versions. Is there a HOWTO for using Pydoc with a current Zope? Are there any new adapted versions of Pydoc? Or is there any better way of browsing the source code? Cheers Joachim -- iuveno AG Joachim Werner _ Wittelsbacherstr. 23b 90475 Nürnberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.iuveno.de Tel.: +49 (0) 911/ 9 88 39 84 ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Documentation
Hi! My name is Manoel from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. I'm very early in Zope. I was wanting make my jobs with a good presentation. So I downloaded "Zope Website Documentation Tool". I followed the instructions. Unpacked the file, copy it to the "import" folder, gonne to root folder in Zope and then clicked "import" button.Unceremoniousness Zope said to me : The object "broken" does not support this operation!Why? What this is mean? Did I make something wrong? Maybe I broke the object?Anybody can help me?I'm running Zope 2.6 in a Pentium 233 stand alone, under Windows 98SE and ZServer. Manoel Filho(55)(21) 3419-4459 Cel. (55)(21) 9879-4684[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
ZEO client configuration is included in the new configuration schema. ZEO server configuration has its own schema and tools, also based on ZConfig and the new zdaemon; you can check these out in the ZODB 3.2 alpha release. Does this mean that Zope 2.7 will require ZODB 3.2 for ZEO users? Zope 2.7 will *come with* ZODB 3.2 (or later, depending on the timing of the Zope 2.7 release), so I suppose so. As an aside, am I the only one who's confused by this new bundling of ZEO as part of the stand alone ZODB product? I don't know. What's confusing for you? The new approach is that: Zope includes ZODB includes ZODB What's confusing about that? --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proposed installation changes for review
--On Tuesday, March 11, 2003 02:39:55 PM -0500 Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does this mean that Zope 2.7 will require ZODB 3.2 for ZEO users? Zope 2.7 will *come with* ZODB 3.2 (or later, depending on the timing of the Zope 2.7 release), so I suppose so. ... As an aside, am I the only one who's confused by this new bundling of ZEO as part of the stand alone ZODB product? I don't know. What's confusing for you? The new approach is that: Zope includes ZODB includes ZODB What's confusing about that? Zope doesn't (currently) include ZEO so to get an up to date ZEO we now have to obtain the correct version of the stand-alone ZODB and extract the contained ZEO. The version numbers of the ZEO and stand-alone ZODB are unrelated so figuring out which ZODB we need to get ZEO is a bit of a pain. Also, ZEO is packaged differently in the stand alone ZODB than it used to be in on it's own. Dan Pierson ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proposed installation changes for review
Zope doesn't (currently) include ZEO so to get an up to date ZEO we now have to obtain the correct version of the stand-alone ZODB and extract the contained ZEO. The version numbers of the ZEO and stand-alone ZODB are unrelated so figuring out which ZODB we need to get ZEO is a bit of a pain. Also, ZEO is packaged differently in the stand alone ZODB than it used to be in on it's own. 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. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 along all the baggage of 2 zserver instances. Its a start, but there's still a ways to go. -- Jamie Heilman http://audible.transient.net/~jamie/ I was in love once -- a Sinclair ZX-81. People said, No, Holly, she's not for you. She was cheap, she was stupid and she wouldn't load -- well, not for me, anyway. -Holly ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 would be better makes no sense to me. 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 picture isn't any clearer for it. I don't see where the UNIX philosophy has anything useful to say about configuration, but maybe I'm just a closet unix hater 0.5 wink. Small programs that do one thing well, written to work together, communicating via a universal interface, have the golden property of being easily replaceable. With this replaceability comes the ease of configuration. I don't see that configuration gets any easier if you have multiple processes. Even if Zope had N processes, there would still be the same amount of stuff to configure. There is more than one way to ease configuration. Reducing the amount of stuff is one way, but sometimes, even after you've reduced till you can't reduce any further, there's still a lot of stuff. Another way to ease configuration is to make things modular so its easier to visualize the flow of data. When the boundaries of communication are clearly defined between modules it becomes easier to understand what part each module plays, and how you can affect the overall result by changing or re-organizing the individual modules. 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 config file are to be held with suspicion. Their longevity inevitably suffers because they are difficult to adapt to new situations. As I watched everyone working on the ZConfig project, I was impressed with how many issues are involved in getting a decent configuration system. Indeed. I don't think that break the server into multiple pieces would make it easier to configure, and I don't see what requirements could have been eliminated to make the project take less work. Well, when you've got some cycles to burn, give it some more thought. It may not be as obvious to you if you don't deal with it on a day to day basis like sysadmins do, but I assure you UNIX owes much of its longevity to the philosophies upon which it was built. Adaptability is a big deal. -- Jamie Heilman http://audible.transient.net/~jamie/ We must be born with an intuition of mortality. Before we know the words for it, before we know there are words, out we come bloodied and squalling with the knowledge that for all the compasses in the world, there's only one direction, and time is its only measure. -Rosencrantz ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 picture isn't any clearer for it. Given the circumstance, what would you propose to do? - C ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 process, but that the bigger picture isn't any clearer for it. Given the circumstance, what would you propose to do? Merge and move on, I'm not asking anyone to throw out their work, just to give thought to what I've said. -- Jamie Heilman http://audible.transient.net/~jamie/ We must be born with an intuition of mortality. Before we know the words for it, before we know there are words, out we come bloodied and squalling with the knowledge that for all the compasses in the world, there's only one direction, and time is its only measure. -Rosencrantz ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proposed installation changes for review
We currently rely on two scripts for running our Zopes: 1. A modified version of zctl.py. I originally got it from a moribund wiki on the Zope site. The main changes we've made have been to better separate parameters for Zope clients from parameters for the ZEO server and to run an additional server of our own along side the ZEO server (a simple distributed RAM Cache invalidation server). 2. A very simple sysv-init script that implements everything by calling the correct zctl.py. It looks like the new install and startup world will be a huge improvement over the current setup on the whole. I like moving the log files to their own directory. The things that seemed to be missing from your writeup were: Almost no mention of ZEO (only one mention of a zeo client name parameter). How does ZEO fit into this? 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? ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Proposed installation changes for review
The things that seemed to be missing from your writeup were: Almost no mention of ZEO (only one mention of a zeo client name parameter). How does ZEO fit into this? ZEO client configuration is included in the new configuration schema. ZEO server configuration has its own schema and tools, also based on ZConfig and the new zdaemon; you can check these out in the ZODB 3.2 alpha release. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: [Zope-dev] Proposed installation changes for review
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 nearly every day. of course it's just a convenience, but it's an important convenience because nearly every document i can find on debugging Zope says roughly ...and of course you can use ZEO, but that's beyond the scope of this article... -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
