[Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 9, OK: 30, UNKNOWN: 2
This is the summary for test reports received on the zope-tests list between 2011-08-16 00:00:00 UTC and 2011-08-17 00:00:00 UTC: See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds. An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our buildbot documentation: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html#the-nightly-builds Reports received Bluebream / Python2.4.6 64bit linux Bluebream / Python2.5.5 64bit linux Bluebream / Python2.6.5 64bit linux [1]FAILED (errors=1) : Zope-2.13-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux [2]UNKNOWN : winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32 ZTK 1.0 / Python2.4.6 Linux 64bit ZTK 1.0 / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit [3]ZTK 1.0 / Python2.6.5 Linux 64bit [4]ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.4.6 Linux 64bit [5]ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit [6]ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.6.5 Linux 64bit Zope 3.4 KGS / Python2.4.6 64bit linux Zope 3.4 KGS / Python2.5.5 64bit linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-32bit-linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-32bit-linux Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-64bit-linux Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-2.13 Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-trunk Python-2.6.6 : Linux Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux winbot / ZODB_dev py_254_win32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win32 winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win64 winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64 winbot / ztk_10 py_254_win32 winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win32 winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_11 py_254_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win64 winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win32 winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win64 [7]winbot / ztk_dev py_254_win32 [8]winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win32 [9]winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64 [10] winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win32 [11] winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win64 Non-OK results -- [1]UNKNOWN FAILED (errors=1) : Zope-2.13-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048274.html [2]UNKNOWN UNKNOWN : winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048255.html [3]FAILED ZTK 1.0 / Python2.6.5 Linux 64bit https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048293.html [4]FAILED ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.4.6 Linux 64bit https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048263.html [5]FAILED ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048265.html [6]FAILED ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.6.5 Linux 64bit https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048264.html [7]FAILED winbot / ztk_dev py_254_win32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048277.html [8]FAILED winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048278.html [9]FAILED winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048279.html [10] FAILED winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win32 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048280.html [11] FAILED winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win64 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048281.html ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.interface/trunk/ Fix a regression introduced in 3.6.4, that made one zope.app.interface test fail
2011/8/6 Tres Seaver : > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 08/04/2011 10:18 AM, Gediminas Paulauskas wrote: >> Log message for revision 122462: Fix a regression introduced in >> 3.6.4, that made one zope.app.interface test fail >> >> >> Changed: U zope.interface/trunk/CHANGES.txt U >> zope.interface/trunk/src/zope/interface/interface.py >> >> -=- Modified: zope.interface/trunk/CHANGES.txt >> === >> --- zope.interface/trunk/CHANGES.txt 2011-08-04 13:44:20 UTC (rev >> 122461) +++ zope.interface/trunk/CHANGES.txt 2011-08-04 14:18:37 UTC >> (rev 122462) @@ -11,10 +11,12 @@ >> >> - Fix testing deprecation warnings issued when tested under Py3K. >> >> +- Fix ``InterfaceClass.__hash__`` to match comparison function. + >> 3.6.4 (2011-07-04) -- >> >> -- LP 804951: InterfaceClass instances were unhashable under Python >> 3.x. +- LP #804951: InterfaceClass instances were unhashable under >> Python 3.x. >> >> 3.6.3 (2011-05-26) -- >> >> Modified: zope.interface/trunk/src/zope/interface/interface.py >> === >> --- zope.interface/trunk/src/zope/interface/interface.py 2011-08-04 >> 13:44:20 UTC (rev 122461) +++ >> zope.interface/trunk/src/zope/interface/interface.py 2011-08-04 >> 14:18:37 UTC (rev 122462) @@ -682,7 +682,8 @@ return (n1 > n2) - (n1 >> < n2) >> >> def __hash__(self): - return hash((self.__name__, >> self.__module__)) + return hash((getattr(self, '__name__', >> ''), + getattr(self, '__module__', ''))) > > I don't think this is a regression -- how do you legitimately create an > interface without both those attributes? The point of the comparison > function is to work even when handed a non-Interface object as one of > the two terms being compared, which doesn't apply to the case of a hash. > If there is code in zope.app.interface which is constructing a class > derived from Interface but which doesn't call Interface.__init__ before > hashing the instance, that code is *broken*, and should be fixed. It was my attempt to fix tests that were failing for more than a week, and it worked. zope.app.interface might be broken, but I couldn't understand why it failed, especially the "foreign connection" exception. Here I saw asymmetry between __eq__ and __hash__, and I still feel that my fix was better than returning 1. In addition to zope.app.interface, there was another problem with Tahoe-LAFS: https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope.interface/+bug/811792 that Tres helped to solve. -- Gediminas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope.interface versions, ZTK 1.0 and later
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/17/2011 09:56 AM, Gediminas Paulauskas wrote: > 2011/8/13 Tres Seaver : >> >> On 08/12/2011 02:46 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: >> >>> %< >>> Proposal >>> >>> - Revert ZTK 1.0 to use zope.interface 3.6.1. (We can skip this >>> part if the next step goes quickly). >>> >>> - Create a 3.6 branch in SVN, and revert all the post-3.6.1 >>> changes on it. Release a new 3.6.6 from this branch, possibly >>> after applying a new, more minimal fix for LP #570942. >>> >>> - Bump ZTK 1.0 to use the zope.interface 3.6.6. >>> >>> - Freeze development on the 3.6 branch. >>> >>> - Release a 3.7.0 version from the trunk, with all the porting >>> changes intact. Update ZTK 1.1 to use 3.7.0, >>> %< >>> >> >> Done. > > It's all good, except that the tests of alternative solution in > 3.6.6 do not pass [1]. > > Also I thought 3.6.2 was good for ZTK 1.0, as it worked on python 2.4 > - 3.2. Only the sorting improvement in next versions broke > something. Nothing in 3.6.2 helps "legacy" uses -- its only changes were Python3 porting tweaks and a non-fucntional change to how documentation was displayed on PyPI. > [1] > http://buildbot.afpy.org/ztk1.0/builders/Python2.6.5%20Linux%2064bit/builds/344/steps/test%20ztk/logs/stdio I > cannot reproduce that failure. The assertion is actually backported, along with the updated fix for comparing same-named interfaces in different modules. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk5LykUACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7S7gCgrh3vYHaE6UGZTjnEb3yEAtdT 5hQAn36EjEDzGHh30VrQGQFHza1ozqDD =pPmX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] zope.interface versions, ZTK 1.0 and later
2011/8/13 Tres Seaver : > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 08/12/2011 02:46 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > >> %< >> Proposal >> >> - Revert ZTK 1.0 to use zope.interface 3.6.1. (We can skip this part >> if the next step goes quickly). >> >> - Create a 3.6 branch in SVN, and revert all the post-3.6.1 changes >> on it. Release a new 3.6.6 from this branch, possibly after applying >> a new, more minimal fix for LP #570942. >> >> - Bump ZTK 1.0 to use the zope.interface 3.6.6. >> >> - Freeze development on the 3.6 branch. >> >> - Release a 3.7.0 version from the trunk, with all the porting >> changes intact. Update ZTK 1.1 to use 3.7.0, >> %< >> > > Done. It's all good, except that the tests of alternative solution in 3.6.6 do not pass [1]. Also I thought 3.6.2 was good for ZTK 1.0, as it worked on python 2.4 - 3.2. Only the sorting improvement in next versions broke something. [1] http://buildbot.afpy.org/ztk1.0/builders/Python2.6.5%20Linux%2064bit/builds/344/steps/test%20ztk/logs/stdio -- Gediminas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] RFC: Proposal for merging jbohman-zope.registry branch of zope.component
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/17/2011 02:12 AM, Adam GROSZER wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 22:50:42 -0400 you wrote: >> >> - - Merge the 'jbohman-zope.registry' branch of zope.component to >> the trunk, and bump its minor version accordingly. > > That sounds to me to rather have a *major* version number bump. Moving from zope.component 3.10.x to 3.11.0 signals "new dependencies / new features, but backwards compatible," which fits here, I think. Moving to 4.0 would signal "likely backwards incompatible." I'm fine either way. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk5LsHcACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7CFgCeN7o+1vf09gzh5PHWxNuMfMqf z5kAnAzGW/Xv5iHZbbkYhF/3bM4snuVS =EguO -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] RFC: Proposal for merging jbohman-zope.registry branch of zope.component
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Adam GROSZER wrote: > On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 22:50:42 -0400 you wrote: >> >> - - Merge the 'jbohman-zope.registry' branch of zope.component to the >> trunk, and bump its minor version accordingly. Great work, +1 on merging (I trust the GSoC mentor did a good code review... ;) > That sounds to me to rather have a *major* version number bump. If backwards compatible imports are left in place, I don't mind it being a 3.11.0 - but it might just as well be time to call it 4.0 :) Hanno ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] RFC: Proposal for merging jbohman-zope.registry branch of zope.component
Hi, On 17 August 2011 03:50, Tres Seaver wrote: > - - Land 'zope.registry' as a full ZTK package, with its own Launchpad > artifacts, etc. This step may also involve moving bugs from > zope.component to zope.registry. This is not a major issue, but just be aware that there's a widely-used package plone.registry (which, in fact, has no dependencies beyond the ZTK) that serves a rather different purpose (http://pypi.python.org/pypi/plone.registry). It may be a bit confusing to people if we have a zope.registry that means something else, so perhaps we could call it something else? As I said, not a major concern. Martin ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
