Re: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
Anthony Baxter wrote: > > Anthony, who might have been spending too long in the bad places of SQL. Maybe getting hooked back on the PHP too? I saw ya, that dodgy bloke in the street, money changing hands... *grinz* Chris ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
> Chris - stay in the stone age, I hear they have fire there ;-) mmm. fre pretty. "Page Templates burn, don't dey. Be a shame if somefing was to happen to your nice shiny website". Anthony, who might have been spending too long in the bad places of SQL. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Undoability on a per-object basis
Chris McDonough wrote: > > It would be best to make make a dual-mode undoing and nonundoing storage on > a per-object basis. ...if anyone achieves this, I will have plenty of beer to send to them. Chris - please, pretty please :-) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
Anthony Baxter wrote: > > deliberately-trolling-for-ChrisW-ly yrs, :-P Chris - stay in the stone age, I hear they have fire there ;-) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: 2.3.3 -> 2.5.1b2 upgrade problem
Shane Hathaway wrote: > > http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/BetterTracebacks > > All the work described (besides the documentation and Dieter's suggestion > of adding error_tb to the default standard_error_message) is checked into > the trunk. No more invalid HTML. :-) Well, it's only taken 2 or 3 years to get that fixed... *grinz* Chris PS: seriously, thanks Shane, at last debugging won't be so much of a PITA.. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
Lennart Regebro wrote: > There is an alternative, and that is to clean up the enhanced > enhanced virtual host monster we at Torped have done. It's based on > sfm@imemes enhanced VHM and just like VHF is makes it possible to > have standalone virtual hosting without strange apache magic. We > added an API to translate virtual to physical paths and back. Just so you know, a limited version of the imeme enhancements is in the Zope 2.5 VHM, and there is a standard REQUEST API consisting of physicalPathToVirtualPath, physicalPathToURL, and physicalPathFromURL. Cheers, Evan @ 4-am ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] how bad are per-request-write-transactions
> That's only if you do it as a property. It doesn't have to be done that > way. Shane and I discussed a counter that existed as a central > datastructure. Objects that were being counted would simply have > methods to increment the count and display the count. FWIW, this already mostly exists in Zope as the (tiny) BTrees.Length.Length class. It's a awfully nifty little piece of code. Anybody who is interested should read it and try to understand it because it's subtly mindbending and ingenious and it is a prime example of why we love Jim. ;-) > Completely agreed. My disagreement is portraying the counter problem as > impossible with the zodb. I think some people, as evidenced by some of > the responses, are willing to live with the tradeoffs. Other people > will find managing a log file on disk to be a more manageable solution. It would be best to make make a dual-mode undoing and nonundoing storage on a per-object basis. But a half step would be to make it easier to use mounted storages ala http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/StorageAndConnectionTypeRegistri es. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: 2.3.3 -> 2.5.1b2 upgrade problem
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Chris Withers wrote: > Shane Hathaway wrote: > > > > I've been putting in code for Zope 2.6 that replaces the functionality > > of ZDebug. ZDebug was always woefully unsafe. Zope 2.6 will have > > improved tracebacks. > > Does that mean we can turn them off when we don't want them and there's no more > of that damn awful appending them to the end of every page and creating broken > HTML? > > please? pretty please? ;-) http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/BetterTracebacks All the work described (besides the documentation and Dieter's suggestion of adding error_tb to the default standard_error_message) is checked into the trunk. No more invalid HTML. :-) Shane ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
>>> Toby Dickenson wrote > Do you remember what we had to type to achieve the equivalent of > dtml-let, before dtml-let was introduced? That *was* horrible. gee, I dunno... has a sort of charm to it. sheesh, it's still not as ugly as ZPT. deliberately-trolling-for-ChrisW-ly yrs, Anthony -- Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It's never too late to have a happy childhood. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
>>> "Brian Lloyd" wrote > We've been trying hard to adopt this bit of Zen. If you write > REQUEST.set, you can look at it and easily see what is happening. > Same with SESSION.set. The other reason why I made SESSION all shouty-caps in SQLSession[*] is to make it _very_ obvious when it's being used. Storing stuff in a session is often one of the critical bits of a web request, so it's important to me that it be clear and easy to see this. Anthony [*] I assume the standard Zope session stuff has adopted the SESSION convention now? it wasn't in CST -- Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It's never too late to have a happy childhood. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
On 4/17/02 9:56 AM, "Gary Poster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 17 April 2002 11:48 am, Brian Lloyd wrote: > >> Ok :) As far as "vetting" virtual host folder, my concerns >> boil down to: >> >> a. dependency / requirement for ordered folder >> >> b. having yet another virtual host thing in the >> core will confuse people >> >> ... > > Hey Brian. Thanks for your response. > > All points understood and appreciated. > > And I guess, then, that I'll choose not to make that commitment, since I'm > looking forward to Zope3 these days anyway. > > If folks still want OrderedFolder (or, at least ordering capability) in the > core I'm still willing to help with that. I'm a little surprised this hasn't come up for inclusion earlier. When showing a site to some top-management folk in a previous life, the question that came up most often was "can we organize those links on the side so that blablabla is first?". One person would ask it, I'd respond with the "hmmm, not easily - at least, not in time for our deployment date". Then the next person would come in late to the meeting, ask the same question, we'd laugh and tell them the scenario - "to make admin easy, it's just listing the documents in that folder that are public, using the API's already available!". They'd go OK. The tour continued. Another straggler comes in, the loop repeated itself... :). For "add-to-the-core" functionality, I'll vote +0.5. I wouldn't mind seeing it in the core, but I also like the idea someone mentioned of a sort of "expansion pack" of other good products that was well maintained alongside each core release. -- Jeffrey P Shell www.cuemedia.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: 2.3.3 -> 2.5.1b2 upgrade problem
Shane Hathaway wrote: > > I've been putting in code for Zope 2.6 that replaces the functionality > of ZDebug. ZDebug was always woefully unsafe. Zope 2.6 will have > improved tracebacks. Does that mean we can turn them off when we don't want them and there's no more of that damn awful appending them to the end of every page and creating broken HTML? please? pretty please? ;-) cheers, Chris ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Need to instantiate zclass in location other than current
I have created a zclass and want to create a new instance of this class and have it be child of some other know object in the tree. Given that we know the path (url) to the new prospective parent how do we do this. A second question. I need to manage lists of these zobjects within other instances of the same, is there a reason to store the url vs the object(s). I have has some problems getting back a string repr of the object "http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
Lennart Regebro wrote: > > Yup. Therefore I think that the host monster shouldn't be included. VHF > should supercede it. > > If backwards compatibility is desired, add warning messages for usage and > remove the VHM from the add box, but continue to include it in the code. :-) Just as a passing comment from an extensive user of the normal virtual host monster: What you're suggesting sux badly, please leave it as it is! cheers, Chris ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
RE: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
--On Wednesday, April 17, 2002 11:48:12 AM -0400 Brian Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We've already learned the hard way that the existing SiteRoots > and VirtualHostMonsters etc. confuse people. This is partly due > to under-documentation, but it is also partly because of the > "here, we'll give you several ways to do it!" approach. True, but... > If there are strong reasons for it to be in the core, then I > suspect it would need to be sufficient to be the "official" > VH solution and we'd want to deprecate the existing things. > That means that it will need to be well documented, and we'll > need to produce the needed deprecation docs, transition guides, > etc. Replacing VirtualHostMonster with VirtualHostFolder (via deprecation, etc.) might be a good decision but please remember those of us who need to use the SiteRoot/access rule combo to do more than can be done with the higher level tools. SiteRoots and access rules are primitives that can not be replaced by higher level simple tools. Dan Pierson ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: 2.3.3 -> 2.5.1b2 upgrade problem
Simon Michael wrote: > "R. David Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>Probably, but I naively imagined that I was sophisticated enough >>to be finding a "real" problem...but I'm obviously not smart enough >>to realize that a breakage this fundamental could be due to a package >>like ZDebug. > > > I wasn't either.. I think the word is getting around now, but it would be > great to see ZDebug updated to work with newer zope versions. I really > miss it. Now you see the pitfalls of creating a monkey-patch product. :-) I've been putting in code for Zope 2.6 that replaces the functionality of ZDebug. ZDebug was always woefully unsafe. Zope 2.6 will have improved tracebacks. Shane ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] DISCUSS: Enhanced MailHost (was: Speaking of 2.6...)
(FYI - I'm changing subject lines to separate the many threads that are going on now...) > just to give some feedback and ask for guidance with the further > process. My college, Nils Kassube, has implemented the proposed > features, regarding an enhanced MailHost, namely the usage of > timeoutsocket in the SMTP-module and the archiving of outgoing mails. > We also asked the programmer of timeoutsocket for permission, although > the module has a BSD-license. He has no problem with the incorporation > of the module into the Zope2 code base. > > Our current plan is to upload a patch to the collector, so other > people, specifically people with a server setup under windows can test > this and to send a note to Zope-Dev seeking for feedback. I have > checkin privileges and also signed the the necessary papers, so later > I can integrate the patch into the code base. Ok. I'd like to run the mbox thing by Jim to see if he has any reservations about that (writing to the FS, potential effect on security, etc.) I also need to talk to the License Gods to see if we need anything beyond a verbal OK from the timeoutsocket maintainer. > Would it be enough to put a documentation in the proposal wiki > and is the proposal sufficient? Should we take other actions? We need to get the relevent "official" documentation updated (help system pages and anything in the Zope book that deals with MailHost up-to-date). Chris McDonough is nominally in charge of making sure doc updates are taken care of ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). You can send doc updates (or pointers to them) to him. > We would like to have this incorporated. Please take this mail as a > commitment notification :-). Thanks. I've updated the plan. Hopefully I can run the mbox stuff by the Zope Pope tomorrow and get back to you then. Brian Lloyd[EMAIL PROTECTED] V.P. Engineering 540.361.1716 Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
RE: [Zope-dev] Speaking of 2.6...
At 17.04.2002 10:57 -0400, Brian Lloyd wrote: > >From the Zen of Python: "Explicit is better than implicit". > >We've been trying hard to adopt this bit of Zen. If you write >REQUEST.set, you can look at it and easily see what is happening. >Same with SESSION.set. > >If you're looking at as a newbie to Zope, your >first thought is probably "where exactly is this being set?". >Who decided that REQUEST was a better place to implicitly set >the variable? Why not the SESSION? Agreed, in this light the set tag turns into a source of confusion. How about a , pair then? ;-) ;-) Stefan PS: Only half joking as the dtml-set syntax is sweet, especially 'optional'... PPS: I know ZPT ;-) -- BLOWFISH n. - Preference for beef ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: 2.3.3 -> 2.5.1b2 upgrade problem
Simon Michael wrote: > "R. David Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>Probably, but I naively imagined that I was sophisticated enough >>to be finding a "real" problem...but I'm obviously not smart enough >>to realize that a breakage this fundamental could be due to a package >>like ZDebug. > I wasn't either.. I think the word is getting around now, but it would be > great to see ZDebug updated to work with newer zope versions. I really > miss it. And Formulator :-) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: 2.3.3 -> 2.5.1b2 upgrade problem
"R. David Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Probably, but I naively imagined that I was sophisticated enough > to be finding a "real" problem...but I'm obviously not smart enough > to realize that a breakage this fundamental could be due to a package > like ZDebug. I wasn't either.. I think the word is getting around now, but it would be great to see ZDebug updated to work with newer zope versions. I really miss it. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: death to index_html; ObjectManager?
On Tuesday 16 Apr 2002 10:25 pm, Casey Duncan wrote: >However, you should know that the crux of this change is really to the >publisher, the mixin is just the management piece. Hmmm. Thanks for raising this. I wasnt aware that these browser_default changes went so deep. Im curious as to *why* they do. It looks like the requirements on the wiki could have been implemented by getting the management interface to add a smart index_html attribute that delegates to the real method. > *any* object can >define a browser_default hook that overrides 'index_html', not just >objectmanagers. Ive just checked through the implementation to see if you really mean *any* object. and you do. The name browser_default is in the namespace accessible to PropertyManager (for properties) and ObjectManager (for sub-objects). I guess this choice was deliberate, but I can see it being a problem for all those objects that are "objects" not "content". I would be happier if this change to ZPublisher was conditional on something outside the through-the-web manageable namespace, and something which means it is turned off by default for legacy objects. Either an interface assertion, or something like: *** lib/python/ZPublisher/BaseRequest.py27 Mar 2002 21:51:05 - 1.47 --- lib/python/ZPublisher/BaseRequest.py17 Apr 2002 08:39:49 - *** *** 254,256 entry_name = path.pop() ! elif hasattr(getattr(object, 'aq_base', object), 'browser_default'): --- 254,258 entry_name = path.pop() ! elif getattr(getattr(object, 'aq_base', object), ! '_implements_browser_default', 0) and \ ! hasattr(getattr(object, 'aq_base', object), 'browser_default'): ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
