Re: [Zope-dev] WebSockets API

2012-11-28 Thread Alex Leach
Hi, just sending again to the list...

On Tuesday 27 Nov 2012 16:51:13 Andreas Jung wrote:
 Use the right tool for each problem. Zope is really not the right choice
 for implementing a websocket server. 

Why is it the wrong tool for the job? I read up a bit on asyncore, and see 
it's supposedly a single threaded server. Is that part of the problem?

The way I see it, zope's got its own web server and framework that handles 
HTTP requests; WebSockets initially connect over HTTP, before upgrading to a 
WebSocket connection. If the 'upgrade' request was recognised by zope, then 
couldn't it just forward the connection on to any WebSocket server? It 
wouldn't even need to do the handshake, but a compatible proxy would no doubt 
need to be implemented.

 There are dozens of better solutions for Python like

The dependencies of all other Python-based WebSocket implementations all 
require a completely different application stack. Twisted, which autobahn 
uses, looks very powerful for low-level networking and the such, but it's a 
beast and I've never used it before, in favour of making templated web apps 
with grok..

Also, wouldn't the front-end socket of autobahn conflict with any other 
running HTTP server? Sure, I could set it up on an alternative port, and use a 
front-end webserver to proxy requests appropriately, based on URL paths and 
patterns, like I do now with grok and Apache. But that adds another two 
complications, when it comes to initially setting up the server. Installation 
instructions for potential users would become even more off-putting than they 
already are.

The zope server already has a good system for URL parsing and dispatching. 
Would zope.proxy be any good at proxying WebSocket requests based on the URL?

 Don't try to misuse a framework for a purpose that it has not been
 invented for.

WebSockets hadn't been invented back then, but HTTP was always meant to be 
bidirectional. Get with the times :b  (jk)

So, I think I understand that zope might not be great for managing 
simultaneous bidirectional traffic, which is basically a requirement of a 
WebSocket server. Could it not be a good proxy either?

Zope-Dev maillist  -
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

[Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 1, OK: 21

2012-11-28 Thread Zope tests summarizer
This is the summary for test reports received on the 
zope-tests list between 2012-11-27 00:00:00 UTC and 2012-11-28 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:

Reports received

   Successful - zopetoolkit_trunk - Build # 90
   Successful - zopetoolkit_trunk_app - Build # 74
   Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
   Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
   Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.8 : Linux
   Zope-2.13 Python-2.6.8 : Linux
   Zope-2.13 Python-2.7.3 : Linux
   Zope-trunk Python-2.6.8 : Linux
   Zope-trunk Python-2.7.3 : Linux
   winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win32
   winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win64
   winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32
   winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64
[1]winbot / zc.lockfile_py_265_32
   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

Non-OK results

[1]FAILED  winbot / zc.lockfile_py_265_32

Zope-Dev maillist  -
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )