Re: [Zope-dev] Re: zLOG changes

2004-04-21 Thread Andreas Jung


--On Dienstag, 20. April 2004 17:19 Uhr -0400 Fred Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

  - when adding
  LOG = getLogger(...)
  LOG.info(...)
to some modules then the output is only written to the event.log but
no   longer to stdout
 (if running in debug mode). Is this change intentional?
I'm not sure what the right approach to fixing this is.  There are a
couple of  choices:
- In debug mode, add a new handler that dumps to standard output.  This is
  fairly easy to code, but is inflexible.
But flexible enough for most usecase. The point is that you want to see the 
tracebacks
on the console during the development phase. Watching the event.log with 
tail -f is
somewhat annoying.

- In debug mode, use an alternate or auxillary logging configuration to
  replace or augment the eventlog configuration section.  This is more
work   up front, but keeps everything flexible.
Maybe too much overkill...not sure if one needs an academic solution here...

Andreas



___
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 2.X Session problems

2004-04-21 Thread alex

Hi Chris,

On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Chris McDonough wrote:

  I am using new Transience.py, and my temp_folder is on Sessions.fs ZODB 
  now. I have one problem with it - it does not seems that this way it 
  deletes old expired Sessions. The number of objects grow and grow, and 
  today we reached limit.
 
 You reached a disk space limit?  Or a number of session objects limit?

We have more then 10gb of free disk space. No, I reached the session 
objects limit. It was set as 1, now I set it as 5, and the counter
is going higher every day.

   I think I have to delete Sessions.fs every night 
  and restart Zope. Is it expected expected behavior when using file 
  storage? I was thinking that only problem of this kind of storage is the 
  need to pack the database sometimes.
 
 That was the intent.  You did pack and it didn't reduce the file size?

Yes, I packed it, size reduced, but the number of session objects still
the same. And keep growing.

Today morning stats (nobody works now, people still slepping at England):

 12567 items are in this transient object container.

 Data object timeout value in minutes: 20

 Maximum number of subobjects: 5

Yesterday there was only 1 session objects. Now, I am packing ZODB:

--- before pack ---
 Database Location: /home/zope/current2/var/Sessions.fs 
 Database Size: 6.2M 
 Transient Object Container at  /temp_folder/session_data
 12568 items are in this transient object container.
--- after pack 
 Database Location: /home/zope/current2/var/Sessions.fs 
 Database Size: 59.8K 
 Transient Object Container at  /temp_folder/session_data
 12570 items are in this transient object container.


--
Alex V. Koval
http://www.halogen-dg.com/
http://www.zwarehouse.org/


___
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] The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Martin Kretschmar
Hello,

Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
Zope. What are your oppinions?

Here comes the translation of his oppoion:

 Maik, what makes you look full of scepticism for
 the future of Zope?

Shortly said, the whole set of stupidities in
connection with Zope3. It is a pretty bad state
for a project, if it looms for years as the
followup project on the horizon but in reality
isn't one! I can't believe the fairy tales with
the possible migration from Zope2 to Zope3.

All the people which have dwelled more or less
deeply into the Zope2 world, thereby having had
an enormous learning curve and now running
applications, will not be able to participate
easily on the academic Zope3 train. The technic
freaks who modell Zope3 are usually not application
developers, which have to build and run working
applications for real human users. The artifical
not-yet-product Zope3 will sooner or later be
distracting development efforts from Zope2 because
Zope3 is almost finished. That doesn't look not
nice ...

Further I see the problem that Zope probably has
no real target group as an application server.
The enterprise world is dominated by .Net and
J2EE. Zope in its current form without a sensible
documentation in conjunction with the drama about
the english zope book doesn't help changing this.
Scripting has arrived in the Java world by Groovy,
so this isn't a reason for using Zope anymore. In
the world of small and medium applications PHP is
likely to stay, because it leads much faster to
results. Zope is to complicated for this.

For the CMS stuff we have Plone, but this is rather
suited for handling some simplistic documents for the
intranet rather then a nice internet representation.
This is because customizing Plone isn't trivial at
all and nobody want's to run web pages with standard
underwear blue. OK, the colours can be changed easily,
other features via CSS, etc. ... 

Maybe I'm simply sick of moving along within web
browsers and the file system without a sensible IDE
and documentation.

Regards, Maik


___
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] When should one call Connection.sync?

2004-04-21 Thread Syver Enstad

I am using ZODB 3.2 in a twisted based web application. I have read
that I need to call sync to keep the connection up to date. When
exactly should I call sync? Are there any drawbacks with calling it
immediately after getting a connection, like this:

# for each http request.
connection = db.open() # (a DB instance)
connection.setLocalTransaction()
connection.sync()

# start using the ZODB here.

# if something needs to be committed
connection.getTransaction().commit()



___
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: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] zLOG is dead

2004-04-21 Thread Chris Withers
Barry Warsaw wrote:

AFAIK, the online logging package docs are about it.  That's not the
easiest way to learn how to use the package unfortunately.
*sigh*

What is the easiest way then?

Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope  Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
___
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: [patch] More secure cookie crumbler?

2004-04-21 Thread Chris Withers
Shane Hathaway wrote:

Even with unbreakable encryption of credentials after login, you still
send the username and password in the clear at login time, and sniffers
can reuse the session ID with ease.  You really shouldn't tell the Plone
users they will be safer with a session token, because they won't.
Well, they will.

You go from being able to sniff from ANY request, to only being able to sniff 
from the login request.

Session ID re-use will only work if the legitimately logged in user doesn't use 
the session they've just logged in to. If they do, both the legitimate and 
illegitimate session will get bumped out.

Now, dependent on your point of view and the sensitivity of your data, that may 
only be a small improvement, but it IS an improvement...

Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope  Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
___
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] The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Chris Withers
Martin Kretschmar wrote:

Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
Zope. What are your oppinions?
Maik's having a bad day, he'll get over it ;-)

Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope  Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
___
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: zLOG changes

2004-04-21 Thread Chris Withers
Andreas Jung wrote:

- In debug mode, use an alternate or auxillary logging configuration to
  replace or augment the eventlog configuration section.  This is more
work   up front, but keeps everything flexible.
Maybe too much overkill...not sure if one needs an academic solution 
here...
I'm guessing there is some kind of log-to-console logger already?

If so, why not just add that in zope.conf and comment it out when you move to 
production?

That seems both flexible and sensible to me, and with no work :-)

BTW, is there a logger in Python 2.3/Zope 2.7 that sends log entries via email?
If not, I'll port MailingLogger to Zope 2.7 and see if I can make it play nice :-)
cheers,

Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope  Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Andreas Jung
Some remarks from my side as a Zope2 core developer on this issue:

The Z2 community and development is currently at a bad point:

- very few people are contributing to the Z2 in terms of new code and bug 
fixes
   (see the tons of open bugs in the collector)

- very few people are willing to contribute to documentation

The reasons for this situation from my prospective:

- Lots of Z2 people are working now  on Plone projects. Plone currently 
attracts more people
   because the important and interesting projects are done there. Paul 
Everits goal to grow
   Zope by 10 times might happen through Plone, not through Zope itself

- The Z2 development is badly managed. The 2.7 release has been delayed 
for one year or so.

- ZC is currently the bottleneck for Z2. Several  important people have 
left  and I don't see any
  new blood there. I see that ZC is focusing on Z3 for the future. That is 
a legitimate goal from
  their own prospective but it does not reflect the needs of lots of 
users. Speaking for the company
 I am mainly working for have invest a lot time, code and money into Z2 
development. E.g. our
 complete company-critical CMS is currently being rewritten on the base of 
Zope2. Several
 other products will be also Zope 2 based. Zope 3 is in the current stage 
not really an alternative
 for complex sites, portals and applications in the style we are working 
on. Z3 might become
 interesting if we have Plone-like functionality available.  To speak with 
Maiks words: Z3 is
 attractive as an academic project to try out things and concepts but it 
does not attract people
 in the current stage...maybe in two years from now but currently most 
people are attracted
 by working and usable solutions like Plone.

- The zope.org community site is a mess. Lots of outstanding problems are 
not fixed, the performance
   of the site is more than poor (it takes ages to login, it takes ages to 
load pages),
   usability (e.g. when you perform a software release) is bad.

We need for Zope2

 - a better and open management for Z2 releases: If ZC can not provide the 
resources in terms
of time and manpower, the coordination and release management should 
be given
to the community. I am sure that more are willing to contribute more 
than at the moment.
Several companies maintain their own Zope version with lots of 
extensions and it would be fine
to see this stuff in a common repository.

- a clear statement from ZC to the future of Zope 2. Zope 2.8 and Zope 2.9 
are considered
   as a migration path for Zope 3 where the Z2 support should be dropped 
after these releases
   (as far as I can remember the vision of Rob a while ago). Who will 
manage Z2 releases after
   dropping the Z2 support? The last solution would be a Z2 code fork if 
we can not come to common
   agreement on the Z2 future but a code fork  would be really the last 
and absolutely worst solution
   for everyone.

- Fix the most outstanding critical bugs on zope.org and speed it up. 
Zope.org is currently a very
   bad figurehead for Zope. If ZC can not solve the problemseither 
give the responsibility to other
   people or just close zope.org.

From my own prospective as developer I would like to see that Z2
development over the next
two or three years continues because there is too much Z2 legacy code in 
the world and not
everyone is interested in following the migration path for Z3. To be honest 
I doubt that large
custom applications can be migrated with a justifiable amount of time and 
money (just because
they are completely bound to Z2 components and its architecture).

To clarify my standpoint: I am not an opponent of Zope3 but Zope 3 does not 
convince me
in the current stage and gives me little attraction for the projects I am 
working onit just can
not compete with Zope 2 if you are building large-scale systems at this 
time.

Andreas

-
ZOPYX - Software Development  Consulting Andreas Jung
www.zopyx.com
--

Andreas Jung

www.zopyx.com Software-Entwicklung und Consulting Andreas Jung
___
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] The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Andre Meyer
Well, Maik has more than a bad day. In fact, he is rather right about 
the points he raises!

I have been developing for Zope for about half a year now and it took 
considerable effort to get anything going. I have experience with 
filesystem-based Zope 2 products, Plone and Archteypes and a bit of Zope 
3. While Z3 looks promising it is not likely to just take over Z2. It is 
too much different. The biggest problem, however is the lack of (any 
useful) documentation and sample code. Without the help of the mailing 
lists you cannot get far with Zope.

With respect to CMS, Plone archetypes are too simplistic for complex 
data/document types and customisation takes too much effort.

Do not get me wrong! I decided to use Zope because it fits my bill and I 
am willing to invest more time in Python/Zope/Plone, because I like it a 
lot (*). But be aware of J2EE/.Net, especially after the Sun/M$ 
agreement. I have been a Java developer for years and I know that there 
are a lot of (commercial) parties to develop whatever anyone needs, if 
you pay them. The same must be true of .Net.

A good IDE for Python/Zope with support for application patterns, UML, 
etc. would be a good thing. Real application development is a serious 
business and good tools are essential, just like deadlines and 
milestones for new releases and up-to-date documentation. I am currently 
using Eclipse with PyDev, but it has a long way to go until it offers 
the wealth of support that Eclipse offers for Java. Boa Constructor is a 
good try, too.

This is meant to encourage everybody, I am an optimist ;-) Beware of the 
pragmatic commercial developers.

(*) fyi http://zope.org/Members/drapmeyer/spyse

Chris Withers wrote:

Martin Kretschmar wrote:

Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
Zope. What are your oppinions?


Maik's having a bad day, he'll get over it ;-)

Chris

--
Dr. Andre P. Meyerhttp://home.hccnet.nl/a.meyer/
TNO FEL Command  Control and Simulation, http://www.fel.tno.nl/div2/
Delft Cooperation on Intelligent Systems, http://www.decis.nl/


___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Max M
Martin Kretschmar wrote:

Shortly said, the whole set of stupidities in
connection with Zope3. It is a pretty bad state
for a project, if it looms for years as the
followup project on the horizon but in reality
isn't one! 
It looks like the classical strategic mistake:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog69.html

Funny thing though is that Joel uses Netscape/Mozilla as an example on 
how not to do it. I think that the jury is still out as to who won the 
browser war.

So it ain't ower until the fat lady sings.


I can't believe the fairy tales with
the possible migration from Zope2 to Zope3.
Me neither. The best we can hope is that it will be like copying a Z2 
product to a folder, and then move stuff out into configuration files 
instead. Perhaps it can be somewhat automated, but I see a lot of 
subtleties that can only be handled manually.

On the possitive side, a lot of the Z3 technologies are allready 
back-ported to to Z2. So Z3 will not be completely alien.

But if Z3 succeds in picking up more developers, as Z3 development gets 
a lot easier and more Pythonic, it can very well be better in the long run.


All the people which have dwelled more or less
deeply into the Zope2 world, thereby having had
an enormous learning curve and now running
applications, will not be able to participate
easily on the academic Zope3 train. The technic
freaks who modell Zope3 are usually not application
developers, which have to build and run working
applications for real human users. The artifical
not-yet-product Zope3 will sooner or later be
distracting development efforts from Zope2 because
Zope3 is almost finished. That doesn't look not
nice ...
It is the single biggest concern about Zopes future. That is correct. 
And not one to be taken lightly.

But the biggest problem with Z2 has allways been the steep learning curve.

Relatively few developers has been able to work on it. The time lost for 
Z2 developers transfering to Z3 could quickly be offset by new 
developers due to an easier development model.

Also, Python is flexible. We will probably see a transition phase, where 
products are developed for Z2/Z3 compatibility. That way we *can* get a 
smooth transition.


Further I see the problem that Zope probably has
no real target group as an application server.
Zope has allways had that problem. But actually it fits very nicely into 
the cms market. Especially with Plone as the base.

Many companies has their own home rolled cms system. They will be 
replaced by open solutions due to scale of economics. It is simply to 
costly to compete against something like Plone.

Zope/Plone has a sweet spot that actually fits most customers out there. 
You can make solutions for a fraction of the cost of what a typical Java 
bases system costs.

Many Java based cms solutions are too costly timewise to implement 
solutions in for many customers.


The enterprise world is dominated by .Net and
J2EE. Zope in its current form without a sensible
documentation in conjunction with the drama about
the english zope book doesn't help changing this.
Scripting has arrived in the Java world by Groovy,
so this isn't a reason for using Zope anymore.
Scripting was never the reason for Zope. The absolutely brilliant object 
publishing model was.

Well that and Python.

It might be Groovy, but Python it ain't!

The things you can do in Zope you simply cannot do as well in other 
systems. The solution fits the problem space *very* well.


In
the world of small and medium applications PHP is
likely to stay, because it leads much faster to
results. Zope is to complicated for this.
The world of small/medium applications will dissapear! The bigger 
systems like Plone can do anything out of the box that the small 
hand-built systems needs to have hand coded.

Why on earth should somebody set up a PHP server and do a lot of hand 
coding, when they can set up a Plone server that does it all for them?

PHP based systems tends to be monolithic blocks. Something like PHPBoard 
is a good example. Setting it up is rather complicated. And using 
several on the same site is also difficult.

I Zope you can have a discussion board in each end every folder, just by 
adding it through a web based interface.

Furthermore smaller systems will grow larger. Then they will get growing 
problems too. Developers allready using bigger systems will find the 
future simpler.


For the CMS stuff we have Plone, but this is rather
suited for handling some simplistic documents for the
intranet rather then a nice internet representation.
This is because customizing Plone isn't trivial at
all and nobody want's to run web pages with standard
underwear blue. OK, the colours can be changed easily,
other features via CSS, etc. ...
That is hard for any CMS system. What system does it better? It isn't a 
simple task to create a skinning system that flexible.

Actually I find Plone to be very well factored for a system of that 
complexity.

There isn't much in Plone 

Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Eckart Hertzler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 21 April 2004 11:53, Andre Meyer is believed to have said:
 Well, Maik has more than a bad day. In fact, he is rather right about
 the points he raises!

 I have been developing for Zope for about half a year now and it took
 considerable effort to get anything going. I have experience with
 filesystem-based Zope 2 products, Plone and Archteypes and a bit of Zope
 3. While Z3 looks promising it is not likely to just take over Z2. It is
 too much different. The biggest problem, however is the lack of (any
 useful) documentation and sample code. Without the help of the mailing
 lists you cannot get far with Zope.


I don't agree. 
I am new to zope. So I tried zope2 first, because plone had a lot of appeal.
I got discouraged very quickly, because zope2 is so very grown over a time 
it's hard to join later.

Zope3 seemed quite well documented and I had no problems going on on my own.
( There is a tutorial, a cookbook, and an online apidoc )

I can say nothing however to migrating apps from zope2 to zope3.

 With respect to CMS, Plone archetypes are too simplistic for complex
 data/document types and customisation takes too much effort.

 Do not get me wrong! I decided to use Zope because it fits my bill and I
 am willing to invest more time in Python/Zope/Plone, because I like it a
 lot (*). But be aware of J2EE/.Net, especially after the Sun/M$
 agreement. I have been a Java developer for years and I know that there
 are a lot of (commercial) parties to develop whatever anyone needs, if
 you pay them. The same must be true of .Net.


Right, I am developing Java applications for a living as well.
I have been focused on consultancy work recently ( writing tech-specifications 
and projectmanaging for a really big publishing company ) and I think Zope / 
python has a good potential for use in commercial apps/systems.

I have had to work with some premium CMSes and some of them really suck.
I'd swap it gladly.


 A good IDE for Python/Zope with support for application patterns, UML,
 etc. would be a good thing. Real application development is a serious
 business and good tools are essential, just like deadlines and
 milestones for new releases and up-to-date documentation. I am currently
 using Eclipse with PyDev, but it has a long way to go until it offers
 the wealth of support that Eclipse offers for Java. Boa Constructor is a
 good try, too.


I tried Eclipse, but its so slow. 

 This is meant to encourage everybody, I am an optimist ;-) Beware of the
 pragmatic commercial developers.


As to be pragmatic: It is easier and faster to write a functionality in python 
than in java and thus cheaper.

I say : beware of the Marketing.

We had to migrate a banking system from a corba/c++ system to J2EE during the 
last phase of the project, because the customer had heard of 'this J thing 
everyone is using'.

 


 (*) fyi http://zope.org/Members/drapmeyer/spyse

 Chris Withers wrote:
  Martin Kretschmar wrote:
  Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
  DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
  Zope. What are your oppinions?
 
  Maik's having a bad day, he'll get over it ;-)
 
  Chris

- -- 

Eckart Hertzler

Senior Consultant
G+J Electronic Media Services GmbH
20457 Hamburg
Tel. : +49 40 3703 7591
Fax  : +49 40 3703 - 5792
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAhlKLxvP4sHhhP/gRAne0AKCXehtMYeMzx1s0N0o+1ph11As/4gCg2Y62
MigAPYapLhAii0HGbEdz84A=
=E63J
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
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] The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Peter Sabaini
is there an URL for the original?

Martin Kretschmar wrote:
Hello,

Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
Zope. What are your oppinions?
Here comes the translation of his oppoion:


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
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 2.6 branch closed for bugfixes?

2004-04-21 Thread Chris Withers
Tres Seaver wrote:
Chris,

I would call the 2.6 branch closed except for serious security bugs; 
please don't check in new features or minor bugfixes there.
How come? and was this announced anywhere?

I don't see what harm applying minor bugfixes to any release branch could do...

Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope  Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
___
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] The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Matt
my nz$ 0.02 worth

- is the future bleak?  nothing seems to awry to me, this copy you 
pasted has no basis for argument - why even bother pasting it

- for some upgrades of zope 2.* I need to rethink some rather 
understandable aspects of my zope products - each one appears to be a 
migration to z3.

- if my next upgrade == z3 and I need to spend more than a few days 
fixing my products, then perhaps something went wrong.  But I don't see 
that happening yet, but then, by being limited to production quality 
releases, I just read the news items and browse zope-dev.



On 21/04/2004, at 7:58 PM, Martin Kretschmar wrote:

Hello,

Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
Zope. What are your oppinions?
Here comes the translation of his oppoion:

Maik, what makes you look full of scepticism for
the future of Zope?
Shortly said, the whole set of stupidities in
connection with Zope3. It is a pretty bad state
for a project, if it looms for years as the
followup project on the horizon but in reality
isn't one! I can't believe the fairy tales with
the possible migration from Zope2 to Zope3.
All the people which have dwelled more or less
deeply into the Zope2 world, thereby having had
an enormous learning curve and now running
applications, will not be able to participate
easily on the academic Zope3 train. The technic
freaks who modell Zope3 are usually not application
developers, which have to build and run working
applications for real human users. The artifical
not-yet-product Zope3 will sooner or later be
distracting development efforts from Zope2 because
Zope3 is almost finished. That doesn't look not
nice ...
Further I see the problem that Zope probably has
no real target group as an application server.
The enterprise world is dominated by .Net and
J2EE. Zope in its current form without a sensible
documentation in conjunction with the drama about
the english zope book doesn't help changing this.
Scripting has arrived in the Java world by Groovy,
so this isn't a reason for using Zope anymore. In
the world of small and medium applications PHP is
likely to stay, because it leads much faster to
results. Zope is to complicated for this.
For the CMS stuff we have Plone, but this is rather
suited for handling some simplistic documents for the
intranet rather then a nice internet representation.
This is because customizing Plone isn't trivial at
all and nobody want's to run web pages with standard
underwear blue. OK, the colours can be changed easily,
other features via CSS, etc. ...
Maybe I'm simply sick of moving along within web
browsers and the file system without a sensible IDE
and documentation.
Regards, Maik

___
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 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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Seb Bacon
Personally, I think Zope3 has a great future, and will pick up a much 
larger community than Zope2 ever did, because it's better designed and 
better documented.

In general, the people who stand to gain immediately (or pretty soon) 
from Zope3 are enthusiasts; newcomers; and ZC.

However, if the process of moving away from Zope2 is not managed very 
carefully and slowly, the people who stand to lose are companies that 
already rely on Zope2.  I agree that the solution is probably to allow 
the community more control over the release cycle, web site, and 
repository.  We could follow various other models from elsewhere in the 
OSS world, and see what happens.

I believe that ZC's apparent reticence on this is because they are 
(understandably) interested in preserving control over their brand, 
which overlaps rather largely with the software.

What would be helpful is a definitive statement from ZC as to whether 
they would consider relinquishing some of their control over Zope 2. 
Perhaps, instead of a code fork, we could have a brand fork, with a 
different website, a different name, and a different release schedule 
(think Fedora?)

Seb

Andreas Jung wrote:
From my own prospective as developer I would like to see that Z2
development over the next
two or three years continues because there is too much Z2 legacy code in 
the world and not
everyone is interested in following the migration path for Z3. To be 
honest I doubt that large
custom applications can be migrated with a justifiable amount of time 
and money (just because
they are completely bound to Z2 components and its architecture).

To clarify my standpoint: I am not an opponent of Zope3 but Zope 3 does 
not convince me
in the current stage and gives me little attraction for the projects I 
am working onit just can
not compete with Zope 2 if you are building large-scale systems at this 
time.

Andreas

___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Stephan Richter
Hi,

the points I snipped I agree with and/or have no new input for.

On Wednesday 21 April 2004 05:36, Andreas Jung wrote:
 The reasons for this situation from my prospective:

  - Lots of Z2 people are working now  on Plone projects. Plone currently
 attracts more people
 because the important and interesting projects are done there. Paul
 Everits goal to grow
 Zope by 10 times might happen through Plone, not through Zope itself

Yes. Note that there are plans emerging for Plone 3 for Zope 3. I hope that we 
will be able to redirect some of the development power of Plone towards Zope 
with Plone 3. And I think that will be possible. Zope 2 has too many 
abstraction layers: Zope -- CMF -- Plone, CPS, ... That means that if I 
develop a product for Zope, it cannot be automatically used in CMF/Plone 
optimally anymore. With Zope 3 we will get a fresh start on this.

  - The Z2 development is badly managed. The 2.7 release has been delayed
 for one year or so.

Yes, I hope we will be able to manage releases in the community for Zope 3. 
Jim encouraged this by asking me to do the current Zope 3 releases (so I hope 
I will be able to give away this responsibility to someone else, when the 
Zope 3 community grows -- it will need someone who is constantly involved in 
the real world and sees the needs for releases clearer than I do).

  - ZC is currently the bottleneck for Z2. 

As stated before, I think that can be changed, if enough interest is shown in 
the community. But I think the Zope community lacks strong leaders; too many 
people are only interested in making money with it without realizing that 
their future depends on the general success and development of Zope.

 Maiks words: Z3 is
   attractive as an academic project to try out things and concepts but it
 does not attract people
   in the current stage...maybe in two years from now but currently most
 people are attracted
   by working and usable solutions like Plone.

And that in itself is the problem. Making money is most important, securing 
the future is second. People don't care about the latter. :-(

  - The zope.org community site is a mess. Lots of outstanding problems are
 not fixed, the performance
 of the site is more than poor (it takes ages to login, it takes ages to
 load pages),
 usability (e.g. when you perform a software release) is bad.

Nobody is willing to contribute. ZC agreed to change zope.org to Plone so more 
community members can contribute. But noone has stepped up; that's very sad.

Regards,
Stephan
-- 
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics  Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training

___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martin, Maik, Andreas, and others,

I see two issues being raised in this thread:

1. Maik disagrees with the design philosophy behind Zope3 (the Component 
Architecture) and the place Zope3 wants to position itself at in the 
future. As a Zope developer who has spent the last two years both 
developing *with* Zope2 and developing Zope3 itself, I obviously have a 
different point of view about the technical part. Whether Zope3 will be 
success in its market niche is yet to be determined. If you fight, you 
can win the war; if you give up now, you've already lost the war.

Since this is more a philosophical issue, or even a matter of taste, I 
am not going to argue too much about it. I find the component 
architecture superior to anything we have seen before and we will soon 
have proofs that it is capable of industrial strength applications. Most 
other developers who are involved into development with or of CMF (such 
as the leading Plone developers) seem to share that point of view; in 
fact, we all can't hardly wait for Zope3 to hit stable.

2. Especially Andreas expressed his worries about the current release 
policy in Zope 2 and its future regarding maintainance and support. I 
have to say that I share some of his skepticism regarding Zope 2. I 
personally have never fully understood ZC's reasons for the release 
roadmap as it is. I might not see the big picture, but I know I would 
have done it differently. I've always tried to make that clear in the 
past. Coming up with harsh criticism now is not very fair, I think, 
especially when you're as in involved as Maik or Andreas.

Zope 2 development has opened for the community a lot in the past. While 
people were to extend Zope2 with more or less useful features (seemed to 
me that it was more than fixing bugs), all the administrative stuff got 
stuck with ZC. Did anyone from the community ever volunteer helping with 
the releases or the CVS administration?
In this matter, btw, the future painted in Zope3 is brighter: more 
community involvement, more innovations coming from the community and 
more administrative tasks taken up by volunteers. Not that I'm not 
suggesting that more help is needed...

Philipp

___
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: [Zope3-dev] Proposal: Rename zope package

2004-04-21 Thread Troy Farrell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tres Seaver wrote:
|
| Jim Fulton wrote:
| ...
| I've gotten enough negative feedback to z, that I've added an
| alternative 4
| to the proposal:
|
|   4. Rename the Zope package to Zope2 and provide a legacy Zope
|  package
|
| -1, for reasons I've stated before.  This is Zope 3's problem;  we
| *can't* inflict the pain on the large set of installed production
| servers to favor cleanliness for the one only installed by
| arrow-backed pioneers.  We would be *much* better off with the status
| quo ante than with such a solution.
|
| Tres.
- -1 on alternative 4.  This lurker is with Tres.  This is a Z3 challenge.  I
wonder how many part-time Zope 2 admins will be happy about making this change
and having to retest code they've inherited from some contract developer.  As a
developer, this change is attractive.  However, I can't see it as feasible for
the real world.
Troy

- --
And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it
together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.
Isaiah 40.5
0xD3BDCA53 http://tjf.us/public.asc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFAhmbnAykmMtO9ylMRAkcRAJwP4FBU5oosHN/3rESobu2ow7XUiwCff0Gv
yzgfB6TI6uOmDFA3Z3zKn78=
=saog
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Max M
Stephan Richter wrote:
Hi,

As stated before, I think that can be changed, if enough interest is shown in 
the community. But I think the Zope community lacks strong leaders; too many 
people are only interested in making money with it without realizing that 
their future depends on the general success and development of Zope.


That is not nessecarily mutually exclusive. But taking leadership is 
only possible if it is easy.

I doubt that Plone would have been a succes if it had followed the Zope 
release schedule ...


And that in itself is the problem. Making money is most important, securing 
the future is second. People don't care about the latter. :-(
Offcourse we do.

But we need to focus on a few areas. We cannot all develop frameworks.

Personally I serve my customers, and write content types for Plone. That 
is a full-time job right there.

I do take pride in making them well tested, and properly documented. I 
don't really see how I can do any more than that.


- The zope.org community site is a mess. Lots of outstanding problems are
not fixed, the performance
   of the site is more than poor (it takes ages to login, it takes ages to
load pages),
Stuff like performance is probably better off left to zc. It is very 
hardware specific, so on-site developers has a clear advantage.


   usability (e.g. when you perform a software release) is bad.
Yes!


Nobody is willing to contribute. ZC agreed to change zope.org to Plone so more 
community members can contribute. 
Well. The switch wasn't very well made. It has become more difficult to 
use. (Why do we need the default state to be private? Or perhaps trusted 
Members could get the reviewer role locally so that it would be easier 
to use.)

 But noone has stepped up; that's very sad.

Stepped up to do what? How do you step up? To me it seems like you will 
get the ability to have endless comitee meetings about how it should 
work. Not the power to just change stuff. Even if it breaks sometimes.

I have enough of that kind of work from my customers thank you ;-)

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 )


[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.6 branch closed for bugfixes?

2004-04-21 Thread Tres Seaver
Chris Withers wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:

Chris,

I would call the 2.6 branch closed except for serious security bugs; 
please don't check in new features or minor bugfixes there.


How come? and was this announced anywhere?
See the last topic in:

  http://dev.zope.org/CVS/ZopeDevelopmentProcess

I don't see what harm applying minor bugfixes to any release branch 
could do...
  - It is a well-established principle of software engineering that the
most likely source of new bugs in mature code is fixes for old ones.
  - People who are still running 2.6 in production are demonstrably
risk-averse (and often for good reason).  Adding non-critical fixes
to the mature branch increases the amount of risk involved in
upgrading production sites, which they typically won't do except to
close major security vulnerabilities.
  - If something comes up which forces us to make a 2.6.5 release,
keeping the diff from 2.6.4 as small as possible is a real goal
for the release manager, who must communicate with the risk-averse
sysadmins.
  - As a parallel, think about the kinds of changes you want to see
*today* to the 2.2 Linux kernel:  if you are still running sites on
2.2, you definitely don't want *any* non-essential fixes being
backported there.
Tres.
--
===
Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zope Corporation  Zope Dealers   http://www.zope.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] zope 2.7.0: no tracebacks produced

2004-04-21 Thread Mika, David P (Research)
Thanks!  I have found the error_log object in the ZMI too.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Willi Langenberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 6:41 PM
To: Mika, David P (Research)
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] zope 2.7.0: no tracebacks produced


According to Mika, David P (Research):
 I am making a big upgrade and moving my products from 2.3.1 on HP-UX 
 to 2.7.0 on windows 2000 and can't get zope to produce any tracebacks 
 when it encounters errors.  I've checked all the log files and monitor
 stdout 
 to no avail.  All I get is a brief html message with error type and value
 and
 instructions to check the error log.

from Zope-2.7.0/lib/python/ZPublisher/HTTPResponse.py:

  # Enable APPEND_TRACEBACKS to make Zope append tracebacks like it used to,
  # but a better solution is to make standard_error_message display
error_tb.
  APPEND_TRACEBACKS = 0


\wlang{}

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Fax: +43/1/31336/9207
Zentrum fuer Informatikdienste, Wirtschaftsuniversitaet Wien, Austria

___
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: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package

2004-04-21 Thread Troy Farrell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
| Troy Farrell wrote:
|
| -1 on alternative 4.  This lurker is with Tres.  This is a Z3
| challenge.  I wonder how many part-time Zope 2 admins will be happy
| about making this change and having to retest code they've inherited
| from some contract developer.
|
| Why would they switch to Zope 2.8 if not for the component architecture?
| So, if you just inherited some code for maintainance, this will
| unlikely break your program. In fact, it won't even break your program
| when the rename is effective, since we'll keep a facade Zope package
| around.
Philipp, not everyone follows well-planned, ideal upgrade practices.  Often,
upgrades come when they can be had, and even more frequently when there is a
security hole and the fix is only available for the latest version or two.  I'm
remembering this:
http://securityfocus.com/bid/9400/

This was the occasion for my upgrade to 2.7, which proved to be a learning
experience.  Fortunately, I used a test instance for my upgrade :)
Deprecation errors are nice, but usually admins take one of two approaches to
them, neither of which is ideal:
1) Ignore them since everything seems to work alright
2) See the apocalypse horsemen headed their direction - this results in
URGENT!!! HELP ME PLAESE RIGHT NOW email on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list.
This will cause many a shock when the occasion for upgrade to 2.9 comes around.
~ At 2 A.M.
As for moving to CA, I'm trying it right now.  I'm working through buddydemo and
trying to wrap my head around the verbosity that is Zope 3.  My plan is that
starting mid-May, all new projects will be on Zope 3 sans the backward
compatibility stuffs.
My personal preference is for option 1 or option 3.

Troy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFAhnF8AykmMtO9ylMRAh31AJ9EmIAtssh9k/CiNFGGMMQRxK0WSACeIRms
1iq79Ikc982nJvp/X15oETE=
=5Kuy
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
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] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 21 April 2004 03:58, Martin Kretschmar wrote:
 Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
 DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
 Zope. What are your oppinions?

I think Chris is right to say that Maik had a bad day. If not, and if he is 
serious about his uninformed opinions as stated in this E-mail, then I feel 
the necessity to reply to his points.

 Here comes the translation of his oppoion:
  Maik, what makes you look full of scepticism for
  the future of Zope?

 Shortly said, the whole set of stupidities in
 connection with Zope3. It is a pretty bad state
 for a project, if it looms for years as the
 followup project on the horizon but in reality
 isn't one!

The reason it took so long is that there are a lot of people that take, but do 
not give back. While the Zope community has thousand's of developers, the 
Zope 3 community never exceeded a core team of 10 people at any given time. 
That is very sad!!!

People use Zope 2 and rest on it. Many do not realize that if you want to stay 
in the technology business, you have to innovate and Zope 3 is just that, 
Zope 2 would eventually fall apart due to bloating and inflexibility. Zope 3 
anticipates this and tries to fix the deficiencies. 

BTW, the TODO list for Zope X3.0 is less than 80 lines long at this point.

 I can't believe the fairy tales with 
 the possible migration from Zope2 to Zope3.

Well, if you have not studied the proposed solutions, what can you expect? I 
personally never believed in a compatibility layer for Zope 2 in Zope 3, 
which was thought possible early on and I made no secret out of it. However, 
the current approach is very simple and therefore realistic. Starting with 
Zope 2.8 or 2.9, you will be able to start developing applications that will 
run in Zope 2 and 3. This will provide a migration path to many. BTW, if you 
think that we do not address your needs correctly, don't waste time 
complaining, but use it to create **constructive** criticism on Zope3-Dev and 
participate.

 All the people which have dwelled more or less
 deeply into the Zope2 world, thereby having had
 an enormous learning curve and now running
 applications, will not be able to participate
 easily on the academic Zope3 train.

academic, huh? To talk about myself, just because I am a Ph.D. student does 
not mean I am academic (in the sense you mean it here). I often consider 
myself as an engineer in science. Furthermore, I have developed many apps for 
end-users before starting to work on Zope 3. Many of the large contributions 
I made were motivated by my application development experiences. The current 
I18n and L10n support, for example, would not be what it is without my 
real-world doings. 

 The technic 
 freaks who modell Zope3 are usually not application
 developers, which have to build and run working
 applications for real human users.

First off, freak has an extremely negative connotation in English, other than 
in German. The German freak is translated as geek to English.

Now to some of the other developers:

Jim (Fulton) -- Over the last years I have been several times in F12g and had 
the chance to get to know him better. Jim has wealth of experience that is 
hard to match. If he cannot think about a good solution or thinks about his 
approach as too abstract, he always talks to other ZC developers (who do 
work on applications all the time) for advise and values it highly. He is a 
true engineer!

Steve -- He has built the first commercial application for Zope 3. In fact, a 
lot of his contributions came from a time were he readied Zope 3 for this 
application.

Marius, Albertas, Bjorn, Victorija -- They develop for Zope 3 because they do 
projects with it. Enough said!

Gary (Poster) -- He uses Zope 3 already in Zope 2 (FrankenZope) for a customer 
project.

Python Labs (Fred, Barry, Guido, Tim and Jeremy) -- Clearly they have all had 
a lot of application development experience. 

Shane, Tres and other ZC developers -- Most of the ZC developers these days 
work on customer projects, so they have plenty of real-world, end-user 
experience.

Martijn Faassen -- All I say is Silva.

Phillipp (von Weitershausen) -- He also builds applications and his 
contributions were often very practical ones.

Sidnei -- Well, he built the second Zope 3 app that actually makes use of the 
strengths of Zope 3 in a way that is not possible in Zope 2.

So I see no reason to believe that we are a too abstract- or academic-thinking 
set of developers. 

**However**, we all need to be academic, because otherwise we would not be 
able to build a stable and well-performing framework for other people to work 
with and build on! Abstract thinking and development is a pre-requisite for a 
good, solid foundation.

 The artifical
 not-yet-product Zope3 will sooner or later be
 distracting development efforts from Zope2 because
 Zope3 is almost finished. That doesn't look not
 nice ...

That will happen, of course, as 

Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 21 April 2004 03:58, Martin Kretschmar wrote:
 Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
 DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
 Zope. What are your oppinions?

To not make the previous mail too long, here my general opinion.

1. Maik likes to do things the quick and dirty way. See Epoz and Mailboxer.

That works well for small and personal projects, but is not the answer for 
large projects. If Zope 2 or 3 would have been built this way, they would 
have already fallen apart. Abstract thinking is a required for framework 
development.

Epoz has been totally redesigned (Kupu) in a more abstract way and works very 
well for end users in Silva...and it is easily adjustable and extensible. For 
Mailboxer I can only say that he should have leveraged the development power 
behind Mailman and develop a nice UI on top of it as I had demonstrated with 
some code a year earlier. This suggests to me he is either (1) not a team 
player or (2) technically not good enough to integrate. It is much, much 
harder to play nice with other projects than starting your own. I have done 
this mistake myself often enough (back then I was not technically good 
enough ;-).

2. Maik is is frustrated with the releases of both Zope 2 and Zope 3, 
including their merging.

First off, I do not develop Zope 2 and I am not involved there, so I have no 
qualified opinion. However, it is always easy to complain about ZC and push 
all the responsibility to them. I bet you that ZC would allow a 3rd party to 
do releases, if they show interest, knowledge and wisdom. However, people 
just keep complaining and do nothing. 

The situation is even more obvious with the Zope book. All the community has 
to do is to give a particular part/chapter/section to a couple of people for 
maintenance. But oh wait, that would need someone to manage this effort and 
*that* would be just too much work.

For Zope 3 however, I can give a very well-informed opinion. Philipp privately 
pointed out to me that people exected Zope 3 technologies to arrive earlier 
in Zope 2, such as the CA and principals maybe. This was not desirable in 
several ways. First, the API was not stable and Zope 2 as a mature software 
would have suffered from the ever changing API. Next, there was still a lot 
of restructuring going on that would have caused interruptions in Zope 2. 
Third, none of the code was optimized and dog slow, nothing someone wanted to 
use for a large site. Finally, we just had no bandwidth for it! Who was to 
support the Zope 3 in Zope 2? At the end it would have been Jim and it 
distract him from finishing Zope 3.

Concerning the release schedule, ZC has little to do with that for Zope 3. In 
fact, I have been release manager since this summer and I am responsible for 
the release schedule and packages. However, I decided not to release often, 
since again we do not have bandwidth to support the milestones. Since the CVS 
is as stable as any milestone release (we have tests for everything), 
releases are less important and it is much easier and less time consuming to 
support the current HEAD, which you can just download via the Web. However, 
we are getting the first alpha out by the end of the month. Hopefully, by end 
of May we will have finished the X3.0 to-do list and will release the beta. 
At this point the API will freeze and application developers are encouraged 
to have look at it.

I have more to say, but I the E-mail would become too long. Overall, I think 
Maik's predictions and scepticism is fairly uninformed from a Zope 3 
perspective. He has never seriously participated in writing 
code/documentation and/or contributing to discussions.

Regards,
Stephan
-- 
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics  Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training

___
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 Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Peter Sabaini
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Wednesday 21 April 2004 03:58, Martin Kretschmar wrote:
 -- snip --

2. Maik is is frustrated with the releases of both Zope 2 and Zope 3, 
including their merging.
 -- snip --

The situation is even more obvious with the Zope book. All the community has 
to do is to give a particular part/chapter/section to a couple of people for 
maintenance. But oh wait, that would need someone to manage this effort and 
*that* would be just too much work.
 -- snip --

Hmph, as one of the people that works on the Zope Book I feel a little 
stung by a comment like this one. While its true that a 2.7 Edition of 
the Zope book is overdue, I still think that the 2.6 Edition was both 
quite a step forward and still largely applicable for 2.7 Zopes

That being said, I wonder if there are people interested to make an 
effort for a 2.7 Edition of the Zope book?

cheers,
peter.


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
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] The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Terry Hancock
On Wednesday 21 April 2004 05:52 am, Eckart Hertzler wrote:
 I don't agree.
 I am new to zope. So I tried zope2 first, because plone had a lot of appeal.
 I got discouraged very quickly, because zope2 is so very grown over a time
 it's hard to join later.
 
 Zope3 seemed quite well documented and I had no problems going on on my own.
 ( There is a tutorial, a cookbook, and an online apidoc )
 
 I can say nothing however to migrating apps from zope2 to zope3.

I'm really looking forward to Zope 3, and I'm thinking about migrating to
it this Summer.

I've been developing an application, which has taken about two years, largely
because developing in the Zope 2 Framework model is like beating your head
against the wall constantly.

That's probably because I'm writing a fundamentally complex web application
which I need to have a lot of large-scale control over.  I'm not writing in
an environment where a slightly-customized ZMI or even a collection of new
Zope objects will quite do the job. I'm writing a system which gives end-users
(NOT CS experts) a lot of control over their environment.  And there are 
fundamental user-interface changes involved.

I also have to do this in my copious free time, as I'm not commercially
employed to do this work (maybe someday, but not now). So in those two
years, I've probably had the equivalent of 2 months of full-time work.  For
somebody dealing with that, the constant pressure to adapt to a changing
platform and the myriad interfaces that break when you do, and the
unwillingness to document these problems because that's too old get
really frustrating.  The lack of formally defined interfaces makes
it very hard to deal with this situation -- it's not easy to mix-and-match
the new parts you need with the old parts you haven't been able to
upgrade yet.

In short -- Zope 2 is TOO LABOR INTENSIVE.  Mostly because it's TOO COMPLEX
and TOO MONOLITHIC.  During the development phase of my project, I've had to
upgrade Zope THREE times, and EACH one REQUIRED A MAJOR RE-WRITE on my part.
That makes it very difficult to concentrate on forward momentum.  I've missed
my own deadlines, and had to admit that I simply can't deliver the product
on anything like the schedule I originally was trying for.  And this 3 steps
forward, 2 steps back problem of dealing with a changing, poorly documented,
and often buggy platform is part of the reason.

The promise of Zope 3 is that it is following Python's TOOLBOX model, and making
it easier to separate out the parts you need into separate interfaceable
components.  This will make life vastly easier for large-scale projects which
don't follow the typical quick and dirty Zope site model.

Or so I hope. ;-)

I don't understand everything else they're doing with it, and I've had frustrations
with Zope 3, but in the long run (which I care about -- I expect my application,
or a later version of it, to be in use in 15-20 years, so I'm not just concerned
with first to market), I think it will be easier to keep up with.

I understand that my situation is probably unusual, but I do want to speak out
to say that there is interest in Zope 3, and I personally expect to be using
it before 2005.

Cheers,
Terry
--
Terry Hancock ( hancock at anansispaceworks.com )
Anansi Spaceworks  http://www.anansispaceworks.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 )


[Zope-dev] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Martin Kretschmar wrote:
Hello,

Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
Zope. What are your oppinions?
Here comes the translation of his oppoion:


Maik, what makes you look full of scepticism for
the future of Zope?


Shortly said, the whole set of stupidities in
connection with Zope3.
Well, thanks for the kind words.  Makes me want to
work really hard to satisfy your concerns.
 It is a pretty bad state
for a project, if it looms for years as the
followup project on the horizon but in reality
isn't one! I can't believe the fairy tales with
the possible migration from Zope2 to Zope3.
I'm sorry you feel that way.

We've tried to be very honest about the road map.
Zope 3 has taken much longer than I expected. I made
a conscious decision a few months ago to actually slow it
down, Why? Two reasons:
- We have Zope 2. While not perfect, Zope 2 is a great system.
  We make out living with Zope 2. The vast majority of ZC
  people work in Zope 2, not Zope 3.
- We want Zope 3 to be as solid and clean as it can be.
  We have an opportunity, before a stable release, to change things
  readily. That will be much harder once it's in production.

All the people which have dwelled more or less
deeply into the Zope2 world, thereby having had
an enormous learning curve and now running
applications,
This enormous learning curve is one of the main
reasons we created Zope 3.
 will not be able to participate
easily on the academic Zope3 train. The technic
freaks who modell Zope3 are usually not application
developers,  which have to build and run working
 applications for real human users.

That's both insulting and incorrect.  Many of the leaders
of the Zope 2 community are involved in Zope 3 and using it.
These people are application developers.

The artifical
not-yet-product Zope3 will sooner or later be
distracting development efforts from Zope2 because
Zope3 is almost finished. That doesn't look not
nice ...
Any new project distracts development from other projects.
That's natural and healthy? Has development on Zope 2 stopped?
No. ZC still puts more work into Zope 2 than into Zope 3.
I expect that to continue for some time.
Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Max M wrote:
Martin Kretschmar wrote:

Shortly said, the whole set of stupidities in
connection with Zope3. It is a pretty bad state
for a project, if it looms for years as the
followup project on the horizon but in reality
isn't one! 


It looks like the classical strategic mistake:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog69.html
Well, I don't agree with this assessment for Zope 3.  We needed
the freedom to work oput new ideas and patterns.  Trying to use existing code
would have been a huge distraction. I think that the result proves that we
were right.  The beauty of our approach is that, having built what we've
built, we'll be able to take advantage of that code in the current platform.
Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Casey Duncan
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 11:36:31 +0200
Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Some remarks from my side as a Zope2 core developer on this issue:
 
 The Z2 community and development is currently at a bad point:
 
  - very few people are contributing to the Z2 in terms of new code and
  bug 
 fixes
 (see the tons of open bugs in the collector)

I agree that bugs deserve more attention. We need to have more bug days.
I meant to suggest a date last week, but I got diverted. How would
people feel about next Thursday, April 29?
 
  - very few people are willing to contribute to documentation

On a bright note, I think zopewiki.org could change that. It *greatly*
lowers the bar on contributing substantive docs for Zope. I would
implore all of you (as in you, the reader of this message, yes you!) to
go there and write something, now! You know something that has not been
written down yet, so go write it down! You can even do so anonymously.

-Casey


___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Max M
Stephan Richter wrote:


Concerning the release schedule, ZC has little to do with that for Zope 3. In 
fact, I have been release manager since this summer and I am responsible for 
the release schedule and packages. However, I decided not to release often, 
since again we do not have bandwidth to support the milestones. Since the CVS 
is as stable as any milestone release (we have tests for everything), 
releases are less important and it is much easier and less time consuming to 
support the current HEAD, which you can just download via the Web.
My only problem is that it is difficult to be an occasional developer 
in Z3 on Windows.

I normally don't develop in c. So I don't have Visual Studion installed.

I have downloaded the milestones and tried them out. But then I read 
about this and that *geddon, and think well guess I should wait for 
another version before I try it again.

I quickly feel out of sync in Z3.

If there was some way to have a Binary core that didn't change very 
often, and a Python only part that I could upload from cvs/subversion to 
be up to date, it would be much easier to use a few hours here and there 
to try out stuff in Z3.

Or perhaps an automated nightly Windows build.

I believe that Chris Withers is testing Z3 nightly on Windows. Right?

Would it be difficult to have that available as a download somewhere? It 
seems that zipping and uploading the test directory is enough.

Being able to grab the builds seems more important than the releases.


However, 
we are getting the first alpha out by the end of the month. Hopefully, by end 
of May we will have finished the X3.0 to-do list and will release the beta. 
At this point the API will freeze and application developers are encouraged 
to have look at it.
Great.

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 )


[Zope-dev] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Martin, Maik, Andreas, and others,

I see two issues being raised in this thread:



2. Especially Andreas expressed his worries about the current release 
policy in Zope 2 and its future regarding maintainance and support. I 
have to say that I share some of his skepticism regarding Zope 2. I 
personally have never fully understood ZC's reasons for the release 
roadmap as it is. I might not see the big picture, but I know I would 
have done it differently. I've always tried to make that clear in the 
past.
I'm surprised to read this. Could you be more specific about your concerns?

Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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 Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 21 April 2004 10:18, Peter Sabaini wrote:
  The situation is even more obvious with the Zope book. All the community
  has to do is to give a particular part/chapter/section to a couple of
  people for maintenance. But oh wait, that would need someone to manage
  this effort and *that* would be just too much work.

 Hmph, as one of the people that works on the Zope Book I feel a little
 stung by a comment like this one. While its true that a 2.7 Edition of
 the Zope book is overdue, I still think that the 2.6 Edition was both
 quite a step forward and still largely applicable for 2.7 Zopes

I was really addressing the people who just sit idle. I know from experience 
that the few who do something always get their beating... I did not mean to 
do that at all. 

But since people are complaining about the quality of the book, it must not 
have enough volunteers. 

 That being said, I wonder if there are people interested to make an
 effort for a 2.7 Edition of the Zope book?

Probably: A lot of people want it, few people want to help. 

Regards,
Stephan
-- 
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics  Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training

___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread robert rottermann

 will not be able to participate

easily on the academic Zope3 train. The technic
freaks who modell Zope3 are usually not application
developers,  which have to build and run working
 applications for real human users.

That's both insulting and incorrect.  Many of the leaders
of the Zope 2 community are involved in Zope 3 and using it.
These people are application developers.
Jim,
we native german speakers tend to be much more direct and phrase dings 
more bluntly the you americans do.
In german I read Maik's statement as a strong opinion but never as an 
insult.

Since I am the one who asked Mike to speak up I would feel bad if it 
created any bad feelings.

Robert

___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 21 April 2004 10:40, Max M wrote:
 I normally don't develop in c. So I don't have Visual Studion installed.

You can also use cygwin.

 I have downloaded the milestones and tried them out. But then I read
 about this and that *geddon, and think well guess I should wait for
 another version before I try it again.

right.

 I quickly feel out of sync in Z3.

yes.

 If there was some way to have a Binary core that didn't change very
 often, and a Python only part that I could upload from cvs/subversion to
 be up to date, it would be much easier to use a few hours here and there
 to try out stuff in Z3.

There is little change in the C files. It is very rare.

 Or perhaps an automated nightly Windows build.

We have talked about it many times before, but simply lack the bandwidth. 
Maybe you could provide this for Cygwin?

Regards,
Stephan
-- 
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics  Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training

___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Terry Hancock
On Wednesday 21 April 2004 09:40 am, Max M wrote:
 Stephan Richter wrote:
  However, 
  we are getting the first alpha out by the end of the month. Hopefully, by end 
  of May we will have finished the X3.0 to-do list and will release the beta. 
  At this point the API will freeze and application developers are encouraged 
  to have look at it.

Well, I couldn't find the antecedent for that quote, but it's really good news!

I'm deeply embroiled in organizing for an upcoming space conference on
Memorial Day Weekend (May 27-31, http://www.isdc2004.org ), so I'm not
able to do *any* programming for about a month, but I will definitely be
checking X3.0 out in June. That's probably when I'll be available to look
at the Schema package and see if I can contribute usefully to it, as well.

Cheers,
Terry

--
Terry Hancock ( hancock at anansispaceworks.com )
Anansi Spaceworks  http://www.anansispaceworks.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] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote:
I'm surprised to read this. Could you be more specific about your concerns?
Did you read Andreas Jung's mail? He was pretty specific, but I had to 
hunt around as in my mailreader his reply had broken the thread.

Regards,

Martijn

___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Max M
robert rottermann wrote:

 will not be able to participate

easily on the academic Zope3 train. The technic
freaks who modell Zope3 are usually not application
developers,  which have to build and run working
 applications for real human users.

That's both insulting and incorrect.  Many of the leaders
of the Zope 2 community are involved in Zope 3 and using it.
These people are application developers.
we native german speakers tend to be much more direct and phrase dings 
more bluntly the you americans do.
In german I read Maik's statement as a strong opinion but never as an 
insult.

Since I am the one who asked Mike to speak up I would feel bad if it 
created any bad feelings.
I would also like to point out that Maik did not post it here himself. 
It's an opinion directed to a group of people that most likely knows him 
and his context better than we do on this list.

There is a big difference in how you can talk about, and talk to, other 
people.

Sometimes you use harder language to emphasize a point. A language that 
you wouldn't normally use when talking to somebody. Generally there is 
nothing wrong with this, but seen out of context it can seem inapropriate.

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] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Martin Kretschmar
Hello,

 Jim,

 we native german speakers tend to be much more direct
 and phrase dings more bluntly the you americans do.
 In german I read Maik's statement as a strong opinion
 but never as an insult.

 Since I am the one who asked Mike to speak up I would
 feel bad if it created any bad feelings.

 Robert

Robert is 100% right! Mikes oppion contains no real
insults at all, not even really bad phrases, at least
not in the original german version. German insults look
quite different, and we tend to recognize them when we
read them.

In this sense I was somewhat careless in my instant
translation and I want to apologize for it.

Martin






___
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 Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Paul Winkler
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 04:18:17PM +0200, Peter Sabaini wrote:
 Stephan Richter wrote:
 On Wednesday 21 April 2004 03:58, Martin Kretschmar wrote:
 
  -- snip --
 
 2. Maik is is frustrated with the releases of both Zope 2 and Zope 3, 
 including their merging.
 
  -- snip --
 
 The situation is even more obvious with the Zope book. All the community 
 has to do is to give a particular part/chapter/section to a couple of 
 people for maintenance. But oh wait, that would need someone to manage 
 this effort and *that* would be just too much work.
 
  -- snip --
 
 Hmph, as one of the people that works on the Zope Book I feel a little 
 stung by a comment like this one.

Same here. Put up or shut up, whiners.

Chris McDonough put a lot of time into editing and
coordinating the 2.6 edition. If he hadn't put out a formal
call for contributors, and organized the whole thing,
it wouldn't have happened at all. I don't hear anybody volunteering
to take over that job. 

-- 

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 )


Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.X Session problems

2004-04-21 Thread Chris McDonough
What do you have the transient object timeout set for?

On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 02:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi Chris,
 
 On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Chris McDonough wrote:
 
   I am using new Transience.py, and my temp_folder is on Sessions.fs ZODB 
   now. I have one problem with it - it does not seems that this way it 
   deletes old expired Sessions. The number of objects grow and grow, and 
   today we reached limit.
  
  You reached a disk space limit?  Or a number of session objects limit?
 
 We have more then 10gb of free disk space. No, I reached the session 
 objects limit. It was set as 1, now I set it as 5, and the counter
 is going higher every day.
 
I think I have to delete Sessions.fs every night 
   and restart Zope. Is it expected expected behavior when using file 
   storage? I was thinking that only problem of this kind of storage is the 
   need to pack the database sometimes.
  
  That was the intent.  You did pack and it didn't reduce the file size?
 
 Yes, I packed it, size reduced, but the number of session objects still
 the same. And keep growing.
 
 Today morning stats (nobody works now, people still slepping at England):
 
  12567 items are in this transient object container.
 
  Data object timeout value in minutes: 20
 
  Maximum number of subobjects: 5
 
 Yesterday there was only 1 session objects. Now, I am packing ZODB:
 
 --- before pack ---
  Database Location: /home/zope/current2/var/Sessions.fs 
  Database Size: 6.2M 
  Transient Object Container at  /temp_folder/session_data
  12568 items are in this transient object container.
 --- after pack 
  Database Location: /home/zope/current2/var/Sessions.fs 
  Database Size: 59.8K 
  Transient Object Container at  /temp_folder/session_data
  12570 items are in this transient object container.
 
 
 --
 Alex V. Koval
 http://www.halogen-dg.com/
 http://www.zwarehouse.org/


___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Andreas Jung wrote:
Some remarks from my side as a Zope2 core developer on this issue:

The Z2 community and development is currently at a bad point:

- very few people are contributing to the Z2 in terms of new code and 
bug fixes
   (see the tons of open bugs in the collector)
In the last year, 37 people make 4215 checkins to the Zope 2
repository.
This doesn't seem to shabby to me.

Here's the breakdown by year:

Year checkins people
2002 7090 33
2003 5276 34
2004 1103 24 # First 3 1/2 months
There is some decline, as one would expect in a mature
product.
These numbers don't include CMF and Plone.

I'd like to see a lot more contributions.  But this still looks
like a pretty healthy development community to me.

- very few people are willing to contribute to documentation
No one likes to write documentation. I think we're making some progress
in this area in Zope 3 that I think will feed back to Zope 2.
The reasons for this situation from my prospective:

- Lots of Z2 people are working now  on Plone projects. Plone currently 
attracts more people
   because the important and interesting projects are done there. Paul 
Everits goal to grow
   Zope by 10 times might happen through Plone, not through Zope itself
Is that bad?

- The Z2 development is badly managed. The 2.7 release has been delayed 
for one year or so.
You keep saying that, but you don't offer to help. We begged for
help with the Zope 2.7 release.  AFAIK, we got very little, so it fell
to us.
- ZC is currently the bottleneck for Z2. 
No, we're not. And it has nothing to do with how much time we spend on
releases. Any time someone wants to help with or lead the release process,
we'd be thrilled to support them in doing so. If the community wants more
frequent releases, they need to help. It sounds like people are trying out
amd giving feedback on the head. That's great! I'd really like to see 2.8 get
out soon.
...

- The zope.org community site is a mess. Lots of outstanding problems 
are not fixed, the performance
   of the site is more than poor (it takes ages to login, it takes ages 
to load pages),
   usability (e.g. when you perform a software release) is bad.
Yes, that's a bad situation.  We (meaning the Zope community) need to do
something about this. Sigh.
...

We need for Zope2

 - a better and open management for Z2 releases:
Please be specific.

Better in what way? Open in what way? In what way have we not been open?

...

 If ZC can not provide
the resources in terms
of time and manpower, the coordination and release management should 
be given
to the community. I am sure that more are willing to contribute more 
than at the moment.
Great! Where are they?  The community led the release of 2.6. I think
that worked pretty well.  We asked for, but didn't get volunteers for
the Zope 2.7 release.
If anyone wants to help with or lead the 2.8 release, I'd *love*
to hear from them.

- a clear statement from ZC to the future of Zope 2.
We've said many times, and I'll say again, that Zope 2 will be with us for some
time.  We won't stop working on Zope 2 until Zope 3 is done (meaning does
everything that Zope 2 does) and there is a clean migration path.
We don't know, at this point, what form that path will take. We just
haven't figured it out yet.
Our short term strategy is to narrow the gap between Zope 2 and Zope 3, by
having them share more and more software over time.  This is what the
Zope 2.8 and Zope 2.9 releases will be about, in addition to community-developed
enhancements, of course.
 Zope 2.8 and Zope
2.9 are considered
   as a migration path for Zope 3
Yes

 where the Z2 support should be dropped
after these releases
No. We've *never* said that. I fully expect Zope 2 releases after Zope 2.9.

...

From my own prospective as developer I would like to see that Z2
development over the next
two or three years continues because there is too much Z2 legacy code in 
the world
Of course. No one is suggesting that we stop development of Zope 2.

...

 To be
honest I doubt that large
custom applications can be migrated with a justifiable amount of time 
and money (just because
they are completely bound to Z2 components and its architecture).
I don't know. You may be right, but I don't think so. We'll have to wait
and see.
To clarify my standpoint: I am not an opponent of Zope3 but Zope 3 does 
not convince me
in the current stage and gives me little attraction for the projects I 
am working onit just can
not compete with Zope 2 if you are building large-scale systems at this 
time.
Absolutely!  Nor should it try to compete at this time.  If you want
the same level of functionality that's in Zope 2, then use Zope 2.
Zope 3 isn't there yet. OTOH, Zope 3 does have some advantages for some
applications. That's why people are building production apps with it now,
even though there isn't a production release.  That's why we're working
very hard to make a production-quality release of what we have now, even
though it 

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Troy Farrell wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
| Troy Farrell wrote:
|
| -1 on alternative 4.  This lurker is with Tres.  This is a Z3
| challenge.  I wonder how many part-time Zope 2 admins will be happy
| about making this change and having to retest code they've inherited
| from some contract developer.
|
| Why would they switch to Zope 2.8 if not for the component architecture?
| So, if you just inherited some code for maintainance, this will
| unlikely break your program. In fact, it won't even break your program
| when the rename is effective, since we'll keep a facade Zope package
| around.
Philipp, not everyone follows well-planned, ideal upgrade practices.  
There's only so much we can do for people who don't.

Often,
upgrades come when they can be had, and even more frequently when there 
is a
security hole and the fix is only available for the latest version or 
two.  I'm
remembering this:

http://securityfocus.com/bid/9400/

This was the occasion for my upgrade to 2.7, which proved to be a learning
experience.  Fortunately, I used a test instance for my upgrade :)
I think your main point is people who skip updates.  Perhaps,
I should have suggested keeping the legacy Zope package longer?
Deprecation errors are nice, but usually admins take one of two 
Warning, not errors

approaches to
them, neither of which is ideal:
1) Ignore them since everything seems to work alright
2) See the apocalypse horsemen headed their direction - this results in
URGENT!!! HELP ME PLAESE RIGHT NOW email on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list.
This will cause many a shock when the occasion for upgrade to 2.9 comes 
around.
~ At 2 A.M.
Would you feel better if we kept the legacy support available longer?

The deprecation warnings are a way for people to find out when somethings
coming.
Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Maik Jablonski
Martin Kretschmar wrote:
 Maik Jablonski of the german speaking Zope Users Group
 DZUG issued a pretty bleak outlook for the future of
 Zope. What are your oppinions?

Hi to all,

I'm not able to respond to all mails in this thread due to a trashed
shoulder (very unlucky cyclocross-crash last week), but I'm feeling the
need to make some simple remarks.

1) Chris is right: Yes, I've had a bad day...;)

2) My initial mail wasn't intended for zope-dev. So I'm a little bit
suprised that it made it to this list. If anyone feels offended (esp. Jim),
I'm very sorry, but if I want to complain about Zope2/3 on this list, I
would use other words. The initial mail (written in german) was written in
a state of fear (not anger). The translation (and maybe my mail itself)
didn't transport my fear about the future of Zope very well I guess.

3) To say it clearly: I would have never started the German Zope User
Group two years ago if I were not totally convinced of Zope (the
technology  the community). Bringing up a community in Germany (with
several big conferences, etc.) was a lot of work (believe me), so I don't
feel as a usual freerider who only complains but does not give something
back to the community. But my resources are limited as well, so I can't
take additional tasks as documentation, release-management, etc.pp... If
this means I'm not allowed to say anything critical about these points then
I'm very, very sorry making any remarks...

4) Stephan, you're right, I did not study Zope3 (and the zope3-dev-list)
very well. My initial approach to Zope3 ended with the impression: huh,
complicated stuff, but I don't have time to work it out in the moment!
Then I've talked to many people who said similar things about their first
experience with Zope3 (maybe I've talked to the wrong people, than this is
my fault, sorry again). So I came up with the impression: yeah, Zope3 is
cool, but complicated (stated as 'academic' in my mail)! (at least if you
don't have the time to work things out by diving into the source). And if
you run several mission critial applications you don't have time to look
into this kind of new stuff. But you're right, Stephan: If you want to stay
in technology business, you have to invent (read: improve by a complete
redesign) the wheel many times. So I don't think that Zope3 is useless for
the future of Zope.

5) But there's some kind of a bad impression in my mind (maybe it is without
any foundation, than all things are in best state): Zope2 isn't maintained
very well anymore due to limited ressources (bug fixes, documentation, see
mail from Andreas), but Zope3 isn't production ready at all. So if you talk
to people making the decisions in the IT-business they say: Zope2 seems to
be a dead horse, Zope3 is just a child which learns to run... Let's settle
our business on more approved technologies like Java / Net (or even
PHP...;)). We can't wait anymore... This kind of frustrating impression
made me writing the mail about the future of Zope, because I'm in love with
Zope and not Java, Net or PHP...

[[[6) Just a personal note to Stephan: You're right again about the
quickdirty design of some of my products (esp. Epoz, I have simply no
knowledge about JavaScript at all (and I don't like it), but Epoz seems to
do a good job for many people until Kupu is finished). 

My job (read: strength) is custom-application-development (talking to
customers and reading their minds, developing prototypes to track down the
issues the customer meant and didn't told me and didn't dream of etc.pp.,
developing  securing  maintaing web-applications which need to work in an
environment with 20.000 students  2000 office-workers etc.), not
application-framework-design-nor-development, so my products are just
some wired by-products of my daily work. About MailBoxer: If you think
MailBoxer is just another mailinglistmanager (like mailman) you didn't
get the idea of it... MailBoxer is a lightweight mailinglist-framework (!,
yes I've done some kind of framework, it can be done better, but it solves
my problems this way) which is built on the power of Zope to achieve some
things you can hardly achieve with Mailman (at least I wasn't able to to).
So I've reinvented the wheel once more to solve some of my
application-needs...]]]

Hope this made things a little bit clearer... I didn't want to attack ZC /
Zope3-devs / the community or anyone else. I'm just fearing that we miss
the train for Zope2 AND Zope3 in the moment... if you don't think so, I'm
fine...:)

Keep zoped,

Maik






___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Jamie Heilman
Casey Duncan wrote:
 On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 11:36:31 +0200
 Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Some remarks from my side as a Zope2 core developer on this issue:
  
  The Z2 community and development is currently at a bad point:
  
   - very few people are contributing to the Z2 in terms of new code and
   bug 
  fixes
  (see the tons of open bugs in the collector)
 
 I agree that bugs deserve more attention. We need to have more bug days.
 I meant to suggest a date last week, but I got diverted. How would
 people feel about next Thursday, April 29?

Have a bug day, might as well.  The problem with bug days is that they
losing ground to the slow but steady trickle of new issues.  A
dedicated developer who camps on the Collector would help
tremendously.

Oh, and about Maik's comment that ZC is the bottleneck in Z2 dev--Jim,
you might not agree with Maik, but hidden security bugs over a year old
aren't something the rest of the community can do anything about.

-- 
Jamie Heilman http://audible.transient.net/~jamie/
Paranoia is a disease unto itself, and may I add, the person standing
 next to you may not be who they appear to be, so take precaution.
-Sathington Willoughby

___
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 Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Chris McDonough
On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 10:18, Peter Sabaini wrote:
 That being said, I wonder if there are people interested to make an 
 effort for a 2.7 Edition of the Zope book?

I am.  I think Paul is too.  It won't be nearly as much work as 2.5 -
2.6.  Let's just do it.  Wanna pick chapters?  I'll get the new book set
up on Zope.org (another BT book) and send the link to whomever is
interested.

- 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] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
robert rottermann wrote:

 will not be able to participate

easily on the academic Zope3 train. The technic
freaks who modell Zope3 are usually not application
developers,  which have to build and run working


 applications for real human users.

That's both insulting and incorrect.  Many of the leaders
of the Zope 2 community are involved in Zope 3 and using it.
These people are application developers.
Jim,
we native german speakers tend to be much more direct and phrase dings 
more bluntly the you americans do.
In german I read Maik's statement as a strong opinion but never as an 
insult.

Since I am the one who asked Mike to speak up I would feel bad if it 
created any bad feelings.
Bad feeling don't last long with me. I couldn't be an open-source
developer if they did. :/
Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Paul Winkler
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 10:41:27AM -0400, Casey Duncan wrote:
 I agree that bugs deserve more attention. We need to have more bug days.
 I meant to suggest a date last week, but I got diverted. How would
 people feel about next Thursday, April 29?

+1
  
-- 

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 )


Re: [Zope-dev] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Martijn Faassen
Casey Duncan wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 11:36:31 +0200
Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- very few people are willing to contribute to documentation
 
On a bright note, I think zopewiki.org could change that. It *greatly*
lowers the bar on contributing substantive docs for Zope. I would
implore all of you (as in you, the reader of this message, yes you!) to
go there and write something, now! You know something that has not been
written down yet, so go write it down! You can even do so anonymously.
That's a great points. Wikis *can* definitely really speed up the 
documentation process. Of course wikis can also die, but the low bar 
towards contribution is really really helpful. Just take a look at 
www.wikipedia.org for an extremely impressive example of what is possible.

Regards,

Martijn

___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:

I'm surprised to read this. Could you be more specific about your 
concerns?


Did you read Andreas Jung's mail? He was pretty specific, but I had to 
hunt around as in my mailreader his reply had broken the thread.
I was responding to Philipp, not Andreas.

Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Jamie Heilman wrote:
..

Oh, and about Maik's comment that ZC is the bottleneck in Z2 dev--Jim,
I think it was Andreas

you might not agree with Maik, but hidden security bugs over a year old
aren't something the rest of the community can do anything about.
Are you suggesting that we hid them?  As soon as we found out about them,
we mobilized the whole company to work on them.  This was a big deal that we
put a lot of effort into over a fairly short time.  How is this evidence that
we were a bottleneck?
Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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: Proposal: Rename zope package

2004-04-21 Thread Tres Seaver
Jim Fulton wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:

Jim Fulton wrote:

Jim Fulton wrote:

Based on recent discussions, I've created a proposal:

  http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/RenameTheZopePackage

to rename the zope package to z. Unless there are strong
objections, we'll do this after we move the Zope repository head to
subversion at the end of the month.




I've gotten enough negative feedback to z, that I've added an 
alternative 4
to the proposal:

  4. Rename the Zope package to Zope2 and provide a legacy Zope
 package


-1, for reasons I've stated before. 


Before you said:
  the amount of third-party code which we would break is incalculable.

 we *can't* inflict the pain on the large set of installed production 
servers to favor cleanliness for the one only installed by 
arrow-backed pioneers.  We would be *much* better off with the status 
quo ante than with such a solution.


I tried to address your concerns.  The proposal should *not* inflict
pain on installed production servers.  Is your complaint that:
- There will be deprecation warnings or that

- We would not enable this by default in 2.9,
Sorry for the misunderstanding, which was mine:  given the current 
deprecation scheme, I am only -0 on the notion.

Tres.
--
===
Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zope Corporation  Zope Dealers   http://www.zope.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 )


[Zope-dev] On a constructive note: Zope 2.8

2004-04-21 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey there,

I understand from:

http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.8/MilestonePlan

Zope 2.8 is now planned for june. If Zope 2.8 is indeed released by june 
this could fit fairly well with my own (also delayed :) plans for using 
this facility in Silva. The obvious area I could try to contribute is in 
integrating Zope 3 interfaces in Zope 2.

Have interfaces stabilized enough to start this work, or should I wait 
until next month (may is indicated on the planning).

What steps need to be taken concretely before such integration is 
considered completed? I know the package rename discussion rename (zope 
to z) in Zope 3 is related to this.

Regards,

Martijn

___
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 Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Peter Sabaini
Chris McDonough wrote:
On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 10:18, Peter Sabaini wrote:

That being said, I wonder if there are people interested to make an 
effort for a 2.7 Edition of the Zope book?


I am.  I think Paul is too.  It won't be nearly as much work as 2.5 -
2.6.  Let's just do it.  Wanna pick chapters?  I'll get the new book set
up on Zope.org (another BT book) and send the link to whomever is
interested.
Ok then...

I think the following issues would deserve attention:

* Installing chapter: I'm working on it and hope to finish soon (no 
really this time!)

* Maintaining chapter update

* Creating Basic Zope Applications: I've been wanting to extend and 
incorporate Jon Whiteners version but never got around to it

* Using Zope Page Templates: judging by the comments there seem to be 
some trouble spots there

* Reference: IMHO one of the trickier things, especially for the API 
Ref. because one would first have to decide what constitutes the API and 
what is simply Zope core...

* A chapter TOC: it would be great if we could have an inter-chapter 
table of contents; would greatly help navigation esp. in longer chapters 
-- I seem to recall that someone once mentioned working on such a 
feature -- Paul maybe?

* Lots of weeding out comments resp. incorporating answers

* Generating PDFs

Anything else?

 - peter.



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Jamie Heilman
Jim Fulton wrote:
 Oh, and about Maik's comment that ZC is the bottleneck in Z2 dev--Jim,
 
 I think it was Andreas

Ah, you're right, oh well apart from who said it...
 
 you might not agree with Maik, but hidden security bugs over a year
 old aren't something the rest of the community can do anything
 about.
 
 Are you suggesting that we hid them?  As soon as we found out about
 them, we mobilized the whole company to work on them.  This was a
 big deal that we put a lot of effort into over a fairly short time.
 How is this evidence that we were a bottleneck?

I think you're confusing the past with the present.  There is at least
1 hidden security bug thats been sitting in the queue for a year
*right now*.  I'm not talking about the stuff that was fixed in the
last audit.  As for why they are hidden, well thats, the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
collector that encourages it, and as ZC runs the collector that puts
the ball squarely in ZC's court.

-- 
Jamie Heilman http://audible.transient.net/~jamie/
You came all this way, without saying squat, and now you're trying
 to tell me a '56 Chevy can beat a '47 Buick in a dead quarter mile?
 I liked you better when you weren't saying squat kid. -Buddy

___
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 )


Call for Zope Book volunteers (was Re: Zope Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?)

2004-04-21 Thread Chris McDonough
I've set up a development BackTalk sandbox for the 2.7 edition of the
Zope book at http://zope.org/Documentation/Books/ZopeBook/2_7Edition. 
Currently it's just an exact copy of the 2.6 Edition book (comments and
all).  I think the plan should be for people to:

1. take ownership of a chapter or two
2. address all the comments in the chapter and get rid of comments
   in places you've addressed.
3. update any material that is wrong wrt to differences between
   2.6 and 2.7.

The prize for taking ownership and updating two complete chapters is
your name as a coauthor on the front page (as before ;-).

Another thing to do is to incorporate some of John Whitener's changes
the lost chapter referenced all over the place within book comments. 
I wonder if he's still around.

At some point in the future, we can backport some of the changes to
the 2.6 book if someone wants to take on that responsibility.

It's advisable to use external editor to make the changes or to maybe
use FTP to get sandboxed local copies of the book and make changes
reuploading them as necessary.  I've lost track of whether FTP access is
possible or not on Zope.org at this point, however.  Does anyone know? 
I've tried a few ports but nothing.

Also, Zope.org is so slow for each request when you're logged in that we
may need to move development to another system.  As a data point, I've
been waiting  4 minutes for Z.org to save a Wiki page... still
waiting.  Hilarious.  Admittedly, it takes a unique brand of apathy to
ignore this, but I've got an excuse.  I'm waiting for the Zope.org
steering committee to solve it!  Chuckle.  In the meantime, what
slowness.. I don't know what you're talking about..

I have given Manager role in the entirety of the 2.7 edition book to
both Peter and Paul.  Anyone else who wants to contribute, please let me
know which chapter(s) you'd like to sign up to revise and I will provide
you access as necessary. I've set up a project wiki for the project at
http://zope.org/Members/mcdonc/ZB_project where people can get a sense
of which chapters are still available.  It may not be available yet...
still waiting for it to save.

I will take ownership of the Installation chapter for now (I will
probably take ownership of some other chapters, but I'll start small...)

- 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 Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Chris McDonough
On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 14:10, Peter Sabaini wrote:
 Chris McDonough wrote:
  On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 10:18, Peter Sabaini wrote:
  
 Ok then...
 
 I think the following issues would deserve attention:
 
 * Installing chapter: I'm working on it and hope to finish soon (no 
 really this time!)

Cool, I'll pick another chapter then!

 * Maintaining chapter update

I'll pick that one. ;-)

 
 * Creating Basic Zope Applications: I've been wanting to extend and 
 incorporate Jon Whiteners version but never got around to it

This is important.

 
 * Using Zope Page Templates: judging by the comments there seem to be 
 some trouble spots there

Yup.  It's ripe for attention like the attention you gave to
Maintaining. ;-)

 * Reference: IMHO one of the trickier things, especially for the API 
 Ref. because one would first have to decide what constitutes the API and 
 what is simply Zope core...

I think we should continue to ignore the API ref except for addressing
specific corrective comments made against it.  The API ref is terrible,
but unless someone has a spare few weeks on their hands to go through
Zope and define APIs, that's the best we're going to do.

 * A chapter TOC: it would be great if we could have an inter-chapter 
 table of contents; would greatly help navigation esp. in longer chapters 
 -- I seem to recall that someone once mentioned working on such a 
 feature -- Paul maybe?

Yes, it's in BackTalk CVS.  I just need to convince ZC to install the
newest BackTalk.

 * Lots of weeding out comments resp. incorporating answers

Yeah..

 
 * Generating PDFs
 
 Anything else?

Backporting changes to the 2.6 edition, although I think this should be
low priority!

- 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: Call for Zope Book volunteers (was Re: Zope Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?)

2004-04-21 Thread Chris McDonough
Sigh.  I think I stressed Zope.org to its breaking point by creating a
Wiki page.  It's down.

- C

On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 14:13, Chris McDonough wrote:
 I've set up a development BackTalk sandbox for the 2.7 edition of the
 Zope book at http://zope.org/Documentation/Books/ZopeBook/2_7Edition. 
 Currently it's just an exact copy of the 2.6 Edition book (comments and
 all).  I think the plan should be for people to:
 
 1. take ownership of a chapter or two
 2. address all the comments in the chapter and get rid of comments
in places you've addressed.
 3. update any material that is wrong wrt to differences between
2.6 and 2.7.
 
 The prize for taking ownership and updating two complete chapters is
 your name as a coauthor on the front page (as before ;-).
 
 Another thing to do is to incorporate some of John Whitener's changes
 the lost chapter referenced all over the place within book comments. 
 I wonder if he's still around.
 
 At some point in the future, we can backport some of the changes to
 the 2.6 book if someone wants to take on that responsibility.
 
 It's advisable to use external editor to make the changes or to maybe
 use FTP to get sandboxed local copies of the book and make changes
 reuploading them as necessary.  I've lost track of whether FTP access is
 possible or not on Zope.org at this point, however.  Does anyone know? 
 I've tried a few ports but nothing.
 
 Also, Zope.org is so slow for each request when you're logged in that we
 may need to move development to another system.  As a data point, I've
 been waiting  4 minutes for Z.org to save a Wiki page... still
 waiting.  Hilarious.  Admittedly, it takes a unique brand of apathy to
 ignore this, but I've got an excuse.  I'm waiting for the Zope.org
 steering committee to solve it!  Chuckle.  In the meantime, what
 slowness.. I don't know what you're talking about..
 
 I have given Manager role in the entirety of the 2.7 edition book to
 both Peter and Paul.  Anyone else who wants to contribute, please let me
 know which chapter(s) you'd like to sign up to revise and I will provide
 you access as necessary. I've set up a project wiki for the project at
 http://zope.org/Members/mcdonc/ZB_project where people can get a sense
 of which chapters are still available.  It may not be available yet...
 still waiting for it to save.
 
 I will take ownership of the Installation chapter for now (I will
 probably take ownership of some other chapters, but I'll start small...)
 
 - 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 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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Andreas Jung


--On Mittwoch, 21. April 2004 10:41 Uhr -0400 Casey Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
On a bright note, I think zopewiki.org could change that. It *greatly*
lowers the bar on contributing substantive docs for Zope. I would
implore all of you (as in you, the reader of this message, yes you!) to
go there and write something, now! You know something that has not been
written down yet, so go write it down! You can even do so anonymously.
Yeah...just had a look a zopewiki.org it seems to be a great place. I 
wonder why we were not
able to built a such place there were it would belong to: zope.org?

Andreas

___
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: Call for Zope Book volunteers (was Re: Zope Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?)

2004-04-21 Thread Peter Sabaini
Chris McDonough wrote:
I've set up a development BackTalk sandbox for the 2.7 edition of the
Zope book at http://zope.org/Documentation/Books/ZopeBook/2_7Edition. 
Currently it's just an exact copy of the 2.6 Edition book (comments and
all).  I think the plan should be for people to:

1. take ownership of a chapter or two
2. address all the comments in the chapter and get rid of comments
   in places you've addressed.
3. update any material that is wrong wrt to differences between
   2.6 and 2.7.
The prize for taking ownership and updating two complete chapters is
your name as a coauthor on the front page (as before ;-).
Erm, there is no front page... you need to realise the truth: its you 
who is the front page /lame-matrix-quoting

Another thing to do is to incorporate some of John Whitener's changes
the lost chapter referenced all over the place within book comments. 
I wonder if he's still around.
Yes he is, I talked about this to him some time ago. In light of this 
its maybe best if I do the incorporating

At some point in the future, we can backport some of the changes to
the 2.6 book if someone wants to take on that responsibility.
It's advisable to use external editor to make the changes or to maybe
use FTP to get sandboxed local copies of the book and make changes
reuploading them as necessary.  I've lost track of whether FTP access is
possible or not on Zope.org at this point, however.  Does anyone know? 
I've tried a few ports but nothing.
Hm, we should make the sources available somewhere. Once Zope.org starts 
working again.

Also, Zope.org is so slow for each request when you're logged in that we
may need to move development to another system.  As a data point, I've
been waiting  4 minutes for Z.org to save a Wiki page... still
waiting.  Hilarious.  Admittedly, it takes a unique brand of apathy to
ignore this, but I've got an excuse.  I'm waiting for the Zope.org
steering committee to solve it!  Chuckle.  In the meantime, what
slowness.. I don't know what you're talking about..
Nono not slow at all merely... andante. Or broken down. Or something.

I have given Manager role in the entirety of the 2.7 edition book to
both Peter and Paul.  Anyone else who wants to contribute, please let me
know which chapter(s) you'd like to sign up to revise and I will provide
you access as necessary. I've set up a project wiki for the project at
http://zope.org/Members/mcdonc/ZB_project where people can get a sense
of which chapters are still available.  It may not be available yet...
still waiting for it to save.
I will take ownership of the Installation chapter for now (I will
probably take ownership of some other chapters, but I'll start small...)
Erm, I'd like the Installation chapter. Already started on it. Really, I 
promise :-)

opening-a-bottle-of-favourite-austrian-beer-and-hacking-away'ly
peter.
- C




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
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: Call for Zope Book volunteers (was Re: Zope Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?)

2004-04-21 Thread Paul Winkler
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 02:13:30PM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
 I've set up a development BackTalk sandbox for the 2.7 edition of the
 Zope book at http://zope.org/Documentation/Books/ZopeBook/2_7Edition. 
 Currently it's just an exact copy of the 2.6 Edition book (comments and
 all).
 Also, Zope.org is so slow for each request when you're logged in that we
 may need to move development to another system.  

Why don't we use the project CVS at sourceforge?
http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=21038
I see you're an admin there.

It doesn't look like it has the 2.6 edition, though.
Everything's 2 years old.


 As a data point, I've
 been waiting  4 minutes for Z.org to save a Wiki page... still
 waiting.  Hilarious.  Admittedly, it takes a unique brand of apathy to
 ignore this, but I've got an excuse.  I'm waiting for the Zope.org
 steering committee to solve it!  Chuckle.  In the meantime, what
 slowness.. I don't know what you're talking about..

They're really crawling now :-(
 
-- 

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 )


[Zope-dev] Better release management (was Re: Zope 2.6 branch closed for bugfixes?)

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Tres Seaver wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:

Tres Seaver wrote:

Chris,

I would call the 2.6 branch closed except for serious security 
bugs; please don't check in new features or minor bugfixes there.


How come? and was this announced anywhere?


See the last topic in:

  http://dev.zope.org/CVS/ZopeDevelopmentProcess
Hm. This document is (understandably), a bit too ZC-centric.
I think we (as in the Zope Community we) need to fix this.

I don't see what harm applying minor bugfixes to any release branch 
could do...


  - It is a well-established principle of software engineering that the
most likely source of new bugs in mature code is fixes for old ones.
  - People who are still running 2.6 in production are demonstrably
risk-averse (and often for good reason).  Adding non-critical fixes
to the mature branch increases the amount of risk involved in
upgrading production sites, which they typically won't do except to
close major security vulnerabilities.
  - If something comes up which forces us to make a 2.6.5 release,
keeping the diff from 2.6.4 as small as possible is a real goal
for the release manager, who must communicate with the risk-averse
sysadmins.
  - As a parallel, think about the kinds of changes you want to see
*today* to the 2.2 Linux kernel:  if you are still running sites on
2.2, you definitely don't want *any* non-essential fixes being
backported there.
These are good points os rational that should go into an updated process doc.

Clearly, new features shouldn't go into a bug-fix or maintenance branch.

Then the question is: what's a minor bug fix?  I don't know who decides that.

I think we (community) need to think about a better release-management process
that allows the community to make progress without being subject to Zope Corp
resource availability.
There are two issues:

- Volunteers

- Process

Maybe we can spend some effort trying to improve the process.

Perhaps we can discuss some ideas.

Here's one:  For each release (e.g. 2.8, 2.9) identify a small
team of release managers.  This team would be responsible for
planning and executing the release, including bug-fix releases
for that base release. That team could establish the policy for
changes to that release, possibly including vetting fixes.
It would be great if someone would volunteer to update the process doc.

Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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: Call for Zope Book volunteers (was Re: Zope Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?)

2004-04-21 Thread Chris McDonough
On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 14:52, Paul Winkler wrote:

 Why don't we use the project CVS at sourceforge?
 http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=21038
 I see you're an admin there.

I'm +0 on the idea.. if you and Peter are more comfortable with it than
using BackTalk, I'll set it up.  It's just difficult to keep the
BackTalk stuff in sync with CVS; we'd probably need to write a script to
do it.

 It doesn't look like it has the 2.6 edition, though.
 Everything's 2 years old.

Yeah, it's dead dead dead.

- 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] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Casey Duncan
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 20:36:29 +0200
Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 
 --On Mittwoch, 21. April 2004 10:41 Uhr -0400 Casey Duncan
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  On a bright note, I think zopewiki.org could change that. It
  *greatly* lowers the bar on contributing substantive docs for Zope.
  I would implore all of you (as in you, the reader of this message,
  yes you!) to go there and write something, now! You know something
  that has not been written down yet, so go write it down! You can
  even do so anonymously.
 
 
 Yeah...just had a look a zopewiki.org it seems to be a great place. I 
 wonder why we were not
 able to built a such place there were it would belong to: zope.org?

I see no reason why it being or not being on Zope.org is relevant. Its a
social thing: Simon decided to do something and had the software,
bandwidth and hardware to do it. People have gravitated to it and it
looks like it has momentum. I see no downside, Darwin has spoken... ;^)

-Casey 


___
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: On a constructive note: Zope 2.8

2004-04-21 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hey there,

I understand from:

http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.8/MilestonePlan

Zope 2.8 is now planned for june.
This is, of course, a function of people's availability to help.

I still need to fix ZClasses, and I need to get through the Zope X3.0
to-do list first.
 If Zope 2.8 is indeed released by june
this could fit fairly well with my own (also delayed :) plans for using 
this facility in Silva. The obvious area I could try to contribute is in 
integrating Zope 3 interfaces in Zope 2.
Great!

Have interfaces stabilized enough to start this work, or should I wait 
until next month (may is indicated on the planning).
I think so.

What steps need to be taken concretely before such integration is 
considered completed? I know the package rename discussion rename (zope 
to z) in Zope 3 is related to this.
That's the big one.  I think I'd do this after we do the svn conversion.
I *hope* to do that next week.
Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Joachim Werner
Hi!

I am not too active on the Zope mailing lists any more because there is 
not too much time left for it. But this thread asks for a comment. So 
here it is:

First of all, I am not sure if the release policy of Zope 3, and the 
whole concept of doing a complete rewrite was right or wrong, but at 
least I don't see a much better alternative. Zope 2 really is getting 
ugly with its age, so just fixing it wouldn't really be too much fun.

What I've been missing in Zope 3 fro years now is a clear focus on a 
single target. Maybe that is the target of Zope 3: not solve a specific 
problem like web content management but be a general toolkit for 
building applications.

But I think it would have been a bit easier and much more efficient to 
start with a rather focussed project, let's say a web groupware system 
or a CMS, then make sure that things don't get too specific. That way 
there would have been a list of deliverables to test all the neat new 
features and concepts against, not just conceptual ideas.

As things are now, me and lots of other commercial Zope users never had 
the resources to really actively participate in Zope 3 because we have 
to earn our living, and that means applications for the end user if we 
don't want to charge for the toolkit (which is obviously no option).

Well, it's not too late for this. The world still doesn't have the 
perfect groupware or CMS application, and maybe Zope 3 can be a starting 
point for it.

The problem of Zope 2 is - don't kill me for saying that - Plone. Plone 
and its foundations in CMF have created a large momentum around a 
terribly horrible code base. Believe me or not, almost everything gets 
more complicated with CMF/Plone than with plain Zope. Building a 
framework on top of a broken framework on top of an ageing framework 
that is hardly documented isn't a very good idea after all. The 
shortcomings in Zope 2 itself should have been addressed and fixed, 
rather than reinventing most of its good parts poorly and keeping the 
bad parts. Send me a private mail for an extensive list of issues I see ;-)

There are quite a few Zope-based CMS solutions out there, and most of 
them are better than their commercial counterparts in many respects. But 
if we had managed to start a joint CMS effort (other than CMF, which is 
a failure by design) two or three years ago things would look even 
better now.

I am currently working on a prototype for a project management solution 
that is going to be used at SUSE LINUX AG. For that I am using plain 
Zope. No Archetypes, no Plone, no nothing. Why? Because while Zope 2 is 
ugly in many respects it still is the most beautiful solution in the 
Zope (2) community. The original Zope concept is great (having a 
filesystem-like structure of objects and a web-based frontend to work 
with it). What I expect from Zope 3 (at least as one part of the 
project) is a better replacement for Zope 2.

The few problems I have always had with Zope 2 haven't been addressed in 
Plone. They probably have been addressed in Zope 3. I'll have to find 
out. What I am looking for is a real rapid development tool for 
web-based (or at least distributed) applications. If Zope 3 doesn't 
deliver that then other solutions will win the war.**

Rapid development can only work if there is an easy-to-understand 
concept or basic paradigm in a system. Zope 2 is such a system. A lot of 
things just got ugly because too much bloat was added later. One of the 
best ideas with the worst implementation was ZClasses. ZClasses would be 
extremely useful if they really worked as expected. In the web frontend 
all we'd have needed is a separation between configuration stuff and 
data (e.g. using two or three tabs instead of one mixing everything). 
Zope 3 has addressed this issue quite well I guess.

What we should work on in the future is development tools for Zope. If I 
get the stuff I know about Zope 3 right it should be relatively easy to 
write IDEs (or plugins for existing IDEs) that add wizards, 
code-completion and lots of introspection, so that I don't have to learn 
all the API but can explore it while developing.

Add an UML-based or UML-inspired graphical frontend to do the 
application architecture.

Finally we need industry-strength performance. The last point is one of 
the most important ones. Zope 2 has lots of very nice features (like the 
ZODB, WebDAV access, etc.). Basically everything is there to replace a 
lot of the most recent Microsoft products (including their planned WinFS 
DB-like filesystem). We are just lacking the performance (mostly thanks 
to Python being a beautiful, but not really fast language).

That's from my part.

Cheers

Joachim

** A final question that is mainly aimed at the ZC people: What is the 
competition you are positioning Zope 3 against? I've never seen an 
answer to that quite important question ...

--
iuveno AG
Joachim Werner
Wittelsbacherstr. 23b
90475 Nürnberg
Tel.: +49 (0) 911 9883 984

E-Mail: 

[Zope-dev] Re: zLOG changes

2004-04-21 Thread Tres Seaver
Andreas Jung wrote:

--On Dienstag, 20. April 2004 17:19 Uhr -0400 Fred Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

  - when adding
  LOG = getLogger(...)
  LOG.info(...)
to some modules then the output is only written to the event.log but
no   longer to stdout
 (if running in debug mode). Is this change intentional?
I'm not sure what the right approach to fixing this is.  There are a
couple of  choices:
- In debug mode, add a new handler that dumps to standard output.  
This is
  fairly easy to code, but is inflexible.


But flexible enough for most usecase. The point is that you want to see 
the tracebacks
on the console during the development phase. Watching the event.log with 
tail -f is
somewhat annoying.
  $ zopectl
  zopectl fg
  export EVENT_LOG_FILE
  EVENT_LOG_FILE=
  /home/tseaver/projects/SFASP/var/zope/bin/runzope
  --
  2004-04-21T15:37:01 INFO(0) ZServer HTTP server started at Wed Apr 21 
15:37:01 2004
  Hostname: quervo.zope.com
  Port: 28080
  --
  2004-04-21T15:37:01 INFO(0) ZServer FTP server started at Wed Apr 21 
15:37:01 2004
  Hostname: quervo.zope.com
  Port: 28021
  --
  
  --
  2004-04-21T15:37:10 INFO(0) Zope Ready to handle requests

Why use the console, when you have zopectl?

--
===
Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zope Corporation  Zope Dealers   http://www.zope.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] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Lennart Regebro
From: Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Year checkins people
 2002 7090 33
 2003 5276 34
 2004 1103 24 # First 3 1/2 months

 There is some decline, as one would expect in a mature
 product.

Also, I expect most people is like me. I only fix bugs if they bite me, and
I understand them OR if there is a bugday, and I understand them and I'm not
too stressed out at the office.

This means that we need more bugdays. A typical bugday squishes a whole
bunch of bugs. They bugs will be harder to squish the more bugdays we have,
since the easy one will be squished first, but no matter.




___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 10:41:27AM -0400, Casey Duncan wrote:
 I agree that bugs deserve more attention. We need to have more bug days.
 I meant to suggest a date last week, but I got diverted. How would
 people feel about next Thursday, April 29?

Stop feeling and do it! No, I can't join, because I'll be on my way to
Sweden that day. So, then have another bug day a couple of weeks later,
maybe I can join then. And so on, and so on...

Of course, my greatest contribution usually is closing bugs reports that are
really support questions, but hey, it's still squishes! :-)



___
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] Better release management (was Re: Zope 2.6 branch closed for bugfixes?)

2004-04-21 Thread Chris McDonough
On Wed, 2004-04-21 at 14:57, Jim Fulton wrote:
 Here's one:  For each release (e.g. 2.8, 2.9) identify a small
 team of release managers.  This team would be responsible for
 planning and executing the release, including bug-fix releases
 for that base release. That team could establish the policy for
 changes to that release, possibly including vetting fixes.

Maybe it would be better to start with absolving ZC of the
responsibility of creating maintenance releases, with the goal in mind
for feature releases to be managed more by the community at some point. 
In the interim, ZC would still be responsible for setting the timeline
and feature set goal for major releases  at least for 2.8 and 2.9.

I suggest this because ZC has already set the goals for 2.8 and 2.9 and
they seem pretty much non-negotiable if we want a Zope 3 transition
plan.  I suspect ZC will want to maintain control over the featureset
and timeline during this (critical) period.  Asking for help without
providing any direct control or input into the featureset and timeline
to the helpers might not work very well: not everyone in the Zope
community is as concentrated on the Zope 2 - Zope 3 transition plan as
is ZC.  I might be wrong about this, I'd be interested to hear any
opinions to the contrary.

This also mirrors the current Python process where the timeline for
maint releases is largely controlled by someone outside the core feature
development team (poor Anthony) but the timeline/featureset for feature
releases is largely still controlled by the core development team.

- 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 Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Paul Winkler
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 08:10:26PM +0200, Peter Sabaini wrote:
 * Reference: IMHO one of the trickier things, especially for the API 
 Ref. because one would first have to decide what constitutes the API and 
 what is simply Zope core...

The long-term solution, I think, is to fix the API mess itself. Eek.
I have a proposal about this here:
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/SanitizeHelpSysAndAPIReference
... but I think this will take a while, and I'd rather get
the book updated first.

I think it's worth hand-massaging the API reference chapter for
the 2.7 book and fixing the embedded docs later.
Yes, I volunteer to do this :-)

 * A chapter TOC: it would be great if we could have an inter-chapter 
 table of contents; would greatly help navigation esp. in longer chapters 
 -- I seem to recall that someone once mentioned working on such a 
 feature -- Paul maybe?

The book already has an inter-chapter TOC at the beginning ;-)
Chris and I worked on an intra-chapter TOC at Pycon. 
My stuff is in backtalk CVS on sourceforge.
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/backtalk/BackTalk/
Just needs a bit of cleanup and it'll be ready to go.

-- 

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 )


Re: Zope Book, was Re: [Zope-dev] The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Peter Sabaini
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 08:10:26PM +0200, Peter Sabaini wrote:

* Reference: IMHO one of the trickier things, especially for the API 
Ref. because one would first have to decide what constitutes the API and 
what is simply Zope core...


The long-term solution, I think, is to fix the API mess itself. Eek.
I have a proposal about this here:
http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/SanitizeHelpSysAndAPIReference
... but I think this will take a while, and I'd rather get
the book updated first.
I think it's worth hand-massaging the API reference chapter for
the 2.7 book and fixing the embedded docs later.
Yes, I volunteer to do this :-)
Brave... and while I'd really like to have a clean API Reference, you 
are probably right that its more important to get the main book updated 
first.

* A chapter TOC: it would be great if we could have an inter-chapter 
table of contents; would greatly help navigation esp. in longer chapters 
-- I seem to recall that someone once mentioned working on such a 
feature -- Paul maybe?


The book already has an inter-chapter TOC at the beginning ;-)
Chris and I worked on an intra-chapter TOC at Pycon. 
My stuff is in backtalk CVS on sourceforge.
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/backtalk/BackTalk/
Just needs a bit of cleanup and it'll be ready to go.
Yay! And, judging by the CVS, done pretty straightforward (I was afraid 
of having to do several parsing passes and such). Cool.






smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Tim Peters
[Max M]
 Or perhaps an automated nightly Windows build.

[Stephan Richter]
 We have talked about it many times before, but simply lack the
 bandwidth. Maybe you could provide this for Cygwin?

[Max M]
 Argh ... that wasn't fair.

 Ok I will try and find some time to look into it.

A problem is that every platform has its own unique bag of miserable quirks.
Case in point:  before we released ZODB 3.3a3 last Friday (which is also the
ZODB in the current Zope2 and Zope3 CVS HEADs), I tried to run the ZODB/ZEO
test suite under Cygwin on WinXP Pro.  Disaster is a fair assessment --
every time the test framework tried to spawn a ZEO process, it died
instantly, with a Cygwin-specific message I didn't understand.  So you need
to be a real platform fan to get a minority platform to work; while I like
Cygwin well enough, I rarely use it, and don't have time or interest to
pursue it as a hobby.

Maybe this is (still) relevant to building Zope under Cygwin, maybe not:

http://www.zope.org/Members/dgeorgieff/howto_zope_cvs_on_cygwin/index_html


What exactly is needed?  I routinely compile Zope2 and Zope3 HEAD on
Windows, using MSVC 6.  I can't make time to set up a fancy snapshot
procedure, but if all people want is (e.g.) a zip file containing the .pyd
files, uploading those once a week wouldn't be a significant time sink.


___
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: The bleak Future of Zope?

2004-04-21 Thread Sandor Palfy
 Maybe this is (still) relevant to building Zope under Cygwin, 
 maybe not:
 

http://www.zope.org/Members/dgeorgieff/howto_zope_cvs_on_cygwin/index_ht
ml

Python release23-maint and Zope 2.7 just builds fine on cygwin with the
usual ./configure, make, make install sequence.

Regards,
Sandor


___
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 )