Re: [Zope-dev] brain.getObject and traversal

2005-04-01 Thread Chris Withers
Florent Guillaume wrote: Well of course no, but I never had to check a getObject() against Unauthorized. Maybe it's because I only use it in a CMF setting where unaccessible objects are filtered anyway. Maybe, but CMF isn't the only use of Zope ;-) OTOH you're a bit excessive in your Whole

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....

2005-04-01 Thread yuppie
Hi! Andreas Jung wrote: I am planning to make the release tomorrow (Saturday afternoon (German time :-)). So please make your final fixes very soon or cry out loud STOP if there are any show stoppers. I'd really like to see http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1460 resolved before the release:

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....

2005-04-01 Thread Andreas Jung
--On Freitag, 1. April 2005 11:43 Uhr +0200 yuppie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I could merge the fix from the 2.7 branch myself, but I hate to check in code I don't understand completely. Maybe Tres or Jim can have a look at this? Or at least review the checkin if I do it myself? Same here :-) If

Re: [Zope-dev] brain.getObject and traversal

2005-04-01 Thread Florent Guillaume
Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unauthorized in getObject is out of the question, that would be new behaviour. Well, in 2.8, new behaviour is expected, right? I really passionately believe that we should not be returnining None in Zope 2.8, and since 2.8 hasn't quite hit

Re: [Zope-dev] Parrot

2005-04-01 Thread Dario Lopez-Kästen
Alan Milligan wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris Withers wrote: | ZEO, multiple clients and processor affinity settings already offer | this, and with no extra development needed... | What userland tools are you using to implement processor affinity?? Alan schedutils. See

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....

2005-04-01 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I am planning to make the release tomorrow (Saturday afternoon (German time :-)). So please make your final fixes very soon or cry out loud STOP if there are any show stoppers. I'd really like to see

Re: [Zope-Coders] RE: [Zope-dev] [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....

2005-04-01 Thread Tim Peters
[Andreas Jung] I am planning to make the release tomorrow (Saturday afternoon (German time :-)). So please make your final fixes very soon or cry out loud STOP if there are any show stoppers. Barring an unexpected heart attack, an alpha-quality ZODB will be in place for you by then. Jim will

[Zope-dev] Re: brain.getObject and traversal

2005-04-01 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Florent Guillaume wrote: Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unauthorized in getObject is out of the question, that would be new behaviour. Well, in 2.8, new behaviour is expected, right? I really passionately believe that we should not

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....

2005-04-01 Thread yuppie
Hi Tres! Tres Seaver wrote: I'd really like to see http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1460 resolved before the release: 1.) AFAICS this bug is easy to fix. 2.) It makes at least CMFDefault sites unusable, deterring CMF users from testing Zope 2.8. I could merge the fix from the 2.7 branch myself,

[Zope-dev] post publishing hook

2005-04-01 Thread Florent Guillaume
I really could use a post publishing hook. Standard use case: delay indexing at the end of the request to only do it once per object even if the object has been modified 4 times. Today there's the REQUEST._hold() hack with an instance having a __del__, but this gets executed outside the main

Re: [Zope-dev] post publishing hook

2005-04-01 Thread Chris McDonough
When do you think it should be called? I just had to override zpublisher_validated_hook to do some stuff that would have been a bit easier if a different hook existed, but that might be a different use case... On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 10:48, Florent Guillaume wrote: I really could use a post

Re: [Zope-dev] post publishing hook

2005-04-01 Thread Florent Guillaume
I didn't know about that hook, but from reading the code it seems it takes place before publishing, not after. There's the recent post_traverse hook too, but that's not what I want. Florent Chris McDonough wrote: When do you think it should be called? I just had to override

Re: [Zope-dev] post publishing hook

2005-04-01 Thread Florent Guillaume
Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When do you think it should be called? I should have answered that clearly: I'd put it in ZPublisher.publish, like this: result=mapply(object, request.args, request, call_object,1, missing_name,

[Zope-dev] Re: post publishing hook

2005-04-01 Thread Christian Heimes
Florent Guillaume wrote: I really could use a post publishing hook. Standard use case: delay indexing at the end of the request to only do it once per object even if the object has been modified 4 times. Using a post publishing hook for this use case isn't a good idea - IMO. The Publisher has

Re: [Zope-dev] post publishing hook

2005-04-01 Thread Dieter Maurer
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2005-4-1 17:48 +0200: ... Open issues are: 1. what if there's an exception in the hook? I'd say log it but that's all. I prefer: fail in the usual way. 2. what if there's a Conflicterror? That's tougher to deal with... The transaction has to be retried, without the

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: brain.getObject and traversal

2005-04-01 Thread Dieter Maurer
Max M wrote at 2005-3-31 14:48 +0200: ... Most of my queries, where I need to wake up objects, has the form:: brains = catalog(portal_type='Document') objects = [] for brain in brains: try: obj = brain.getObject() if not obj is None:

Re: [Zope-dev] brain.getObject and traversal

2005-04-01 Thread Dieter Maurer
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2005-4-1 13:21 +0200: Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unauthorized in getObject is out of the question, that would be new behaviour. Well, in 2.8, new behaviour is expected, right? I really passionately believe that we should not be returnining

[Zope-dev] Re: ZPT: defer expression fix

2005-04-01 Thread Evan Simpson
Christian Heimes wrote: * DeferWrapper didn't cache the result of the expression like ordinary vars do. This was intended, though you couldn't know that since I never documented this. Consider the following terrible example: div tal:define=xis defer:string:x is $x p tal:repeat=x

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....

2005-04-01 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: I'd really like to see http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1460 resolved before the release: 1.) AFAICS this bug is easy to fix. 2.) It makes at least CMFDefault sites unusable, deterring CMF users from

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....

2005-04-01 Thread Tim Peters
[Tim Peters] ... All the substantive changes I needed to make were completed last night, and the overnight test runs were successful. I still need to write up ZODB NEWS, fiddle the version numbers, make a 3.4a1 release tag, and edit the svn:externals in Zope trunk to point at that tag.

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: post publishing hook

2005-04-01 Thread Florent Guillaume
Christian Heimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Florent Guillaume wrote: I really could use a post publishing hook. Standard use case: delay indexing at the end of the request to only do it once per object even if the object has been modified 4 times. Using a post publishing hook for this

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: brain.getObject and traversal

2005-04-01 Thread Florent Guillaume
Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is everyone ok with returning - the object if it can be accessed - raise Unauthorized if it can't be accessed - raise NotFound if it's not there and never return None ? I'll change that before tomorrow, for 2.8a2. (I'll change NotFound

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....

2005-04-01 Thread Andreas Jung
--On Freitag, 1. April 2005 18:44 Uhr -0500 Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Tim Peters] ... All the substantive changes I needed to make were completed last night, and the overnight test runs were successful. I still need to write up ZODB NEWS, fiddle the version numbers, make a 3.4a1