[Zope-dev] State of the philikon-aq-and-__parent__ branch

Hi, as some of you may have noticed I worked a bit more on philikon's branch which makes Acquisition and in return the Zope2 security machinery aware of __parent__ pointers. The branch can be found here: svn+ssh://svn.zope.org/repos/main/Zope/branches/philikon-aq-and-__parent__ The current state

[Zope-dev] Re: State of the philikon-aq-and-__parent__ branch

Hi. Martin Aspeli wrote: > Hanno Schlichting wrote: >> as some of you may have noticed I worked a bit more on philikon's branch >> which makes Acquisition and in return the Zope2 security machinery aware >> of __parent__ pointers. >> >> The current state is t

[Zope-dev] Re: State of the philikon-aq-and-__parent__ branch

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > Hanno Schlichting wrote: >> as some of you may have noticed I worked a bit more on philikon's branch >> which makes Acquisition and in return the Zope2 security machinery aware >> of __parent__ pointers. > > Yay, thanks Hanno! &g

[Zope-dev] Re: Moving the Zope 2 bugtracker to Launchpad

Jens Vagelpohl wrote: > On 13 Aug 2007, at 11:11, Hanno Schlichting wrote: >>> One could also move the CMF bugtracker to LP at the same time. Then only >>> the APE and the PAS trackers would remain. The PAS tracker is already >>> empty and the APE tracker is also pre

[Zope-dev] Re: Moving the Zope 2 bugtracker to Launchpad

Andreas Jung wrote: > --On 12. August 2007 19:53:57 +0200 Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> to make it short: I propose to move the Zope 2 bugtracker to >> Launchpad. Since the Zope 3 bugtracker works already with success on >> LP we >> should follow with the Zope 2 bugtracker. Objectio

[Zope-dev] Re: request.locale

Laurence Rowe wrote: > Quite a lot of zope3 code (zc.datetimewidget for instance) expects to be > able to access request.locale. ZPublisher does not provide this and to > get around the limitation you must manually set request.locale in your > view using Products.CMFDefault.formlib.form.getLocale.

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: request.locale

Dieter Maurer wrote: > Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2007-9-8 00:47 +0200: >> ... >> My suggestion on this would be to make request.locale available in Zope >> 2.11. It would not be available through any of the other means like >> request['locale'] or reques

[Zope-dev] Re: request.locale

Dieter Maurer wrote: > Hanno Schlichting wrote at 2007-9-9 11:58 +0200: >> ... >> Obviously this needs a bit of rather hairy code > > Indeed, as you must not define 'locale' as a request attribute > (it may hide 'locale' "set otherwise") bu

[Zope-dev] Re: request.locale

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > Hanno Schlichting wrote: >> >> We already do something similar for the request.debug variable, but this >> uses a stack frame hack which limits the debug attribute to be shown to >> code in the zope.* packages. >> >> For the

[Zope-dev] Undeprecation of manage_afterAdd and manage_beforeDelete?

Hi. Zope 2 currently emits deprecation warnings about old-style event methods in OFS, for example manage_afterAdd and manage_beforeDelete. The deprecation warning states that these methods won't be called anymore in Zope 2.11. I would like to turn this deprecation warning into a discouraged warn

[Zope-dev] Re: Undeprecation of manage_afterAdd and manage_beforeDelete?

Lennart Regebro wrote: > On 10/9/07, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Plone 3.0 needs Zope 2.10.3, anything earlier does not work. > > Oh, I thought the idea was to always support two Zope versions? I'm > happy to hear that this isn't the case. For 3.0 we needed the improved local c

[Zope-dev] Re: [Checkins] SVN: Zope/trunk/ Added LAZY_FILE_LOADING constant to PageTemplateFile. When set to True Page Template files aren't lo

Hi. Christian Theune wrote: > Cool, > > Am Dienstag, den 16.10.2007, 17:16 -0400 schrieb Hanno Schlichting: >> Log message for revision 80896: >> Added LAZY_FILE_LOADING constant to PageTemplateFile. When set to True >> Page Template files aren't lo >

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Moved two implements declarations from Five into the proper classes.

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > Hanno Schlichting wrote: >> Log message for revision 80945: >> Moved two implements declarations from Five into the proper classes. > > I object to this change. HTTPRequest does not really fulfil the > IBrowserRequest interface, and Ob

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: zope.component/trunk/ Optimized un/registerUtility via storing an optimized data structure for

Martijn Faassen wrote: > Hanno Schlichting wrote: >> Log message for revision 81348: >> Optimized un/registerUtility via storing an optimized data structure >> for >> efficient retrieval of already registered utilities. This avoids >> looping over >> a

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: zope.component/trunk/ Optimized un/registerUtility via storing an optimized data structure for

Martijn Faassen wrote: > Hanno Schlichting wrote: >> Martijn Faassen wrote: >>> Hanno Schlichting wrote: >>>> Log message for revision 81348: >>>> Optimized un/registerUtility via storing an optimized data structure >>>> for >>>>

[Zope-dev] Re: Additional locales for zope.i18n.locales.data?

Nathan Yergler wrote: > On 11/27/07, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Nathan Yergler wrote: >>> I've run into a problem this morning with i18n in Zope3, and I'm not >>> exactly sure what the appropriate approach is. We have a set of South >>> African translations, paticularl

[Zope-dev] Re: [OFF] Does Zope developers have time machine?

Mikhail Kashkin wrote: > Looks like open source developers, especial Zope 3, have enough money to > buy Time machine. Check Zope 3 profile on Ohloh.net > http://www.ohloh.net/projects/4495?p=Zope+3 > > Codebase 138,855,676 LOC > Effort (est.) 49267 Person Years > $2,709,689,938 T

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope 2.11] Stepping forward and going beta

Sidnei da Silva wrote: > On Dec 9, 2007 5:30 AM, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Objections? Thoughts? > > That branch didn't look like it was far off being finished. Is there a > TODO of what is pending to finish it? The good news is that all Zope tests are passing and all the heavy l

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope 2.11] Stepping forward and going beta

Andreas Jung wrote: > the Zope 2.11 beta phase has been delayed for while. The reason for > holding but the release was Philipps and Hannos work on the > > > > branch. Unfortunately both can't work (lack of personal time) on the > branch and finish

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope 2.11] Stepping forward and going beta

Hanno Schlichting wrote: > Andreas Jung wrote: > > The only thing I'm going to do if no one objects is to deprecate calling > the ViewPageTemplateFile in Five without passing in the view. This > should at least allow us to merge the aq-branch without any problems for >

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope 2.11] KGS incomplete (Was: Stepping forward and going beta)

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > On 24 Dec 2007, at 16:32 , Andreas Jung wrote: WARN: KGS incomplete - zope.app.content_types not found WARN: KGS incomplete - zope.app.event not found WARN: KGS incomplete - zope.app.filerepresentation not found WARN: KGS incomplete - zope.app.

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope 2.11] KGS incomplete (Was: Stepping forward and going beta)

Andreas Jung wrote: > --On 28. Dezember 2007 17:56:20 +0100 Hanno Schlichting > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Now all of those above packages aren't in the beta1 tarball. I'd >> consider this a bug, right? > > I removed the externals so they are not in t

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope 2.11] KGS incomplete (Was: Stepping forward and going beta)

Andreas Jung wrote: > --On 29. Dezember 2007 08:17:43 +0100 Hanno Schlichting > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Adding those deprecated but still functional packages to the KGS would >> be one way, but seems to be a bit of work. > > I just wonder what deprecatio

[Zope-dev] Re: Acquisition in Python2.5

Tres Seaver wrote: Nikhil N wrote: Hmm, very strange. I just did: I used: $ workingenv aq $ source aq/bin/activate $ easy_install Acquisition $ python For both Python 2.4 and 2.5 and can reproduce the problem. >>> from ExtensionClass import Base >>> from Acquisition import Implicit >>>

[Zope-dev] Re: Five and browser-oriented components

Hi. Martin Aspeli wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: Technically, I think that this is going to be hard. You'd need to patch in the magic acquisition base class. Acquisition is the main reason that some of the code needed to be duplicated - without the existence of acquisition wrappers, security

[Zope-dev] Re: [Launchpad] Permissions for changing status of a ticket?

Morning! Andreas Jung wrote: last night, roughly 20 tickets of the Zope 2 tracker were marked as Invalid by a person (never heard its name) which is no part of the Zope 2 developers group on LP. Independent of each ticket I am a bit surprised that obviously any authenticated LP user is able

[Zope-dev] Re: Five and browser-oriented components

Martijn Faassen wrote: Alexander Limi wrote: On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:11:11 -0700, Philipp von Weitershausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: *IF* you'd like to be pragmatic, I'd suggest we clean up those failing Plone tests, merge the branch and be on our way. This gets back to Hanno's suggestion

[Zope-dev] AQ-Parent branch test failues was: Re: Five and browser-oriented components

Hi again. Hanno Schlichting wrote: I kept my promise and added the simple tests for the first two issues I found while doing testing against Plone. I have meanwhile fixed the first trivial issue (conflicting argument called 'instance') and added a simple test for the second one.

[Zope-dev] Proposal: Merge philikon-aq branch into Zope trunk

Hi. I'd like to propose to merge the philikon-aq branch into Zope trunk aka Zope 2.12. Scope: For those unfamiliar with the branch, it makes Acquisition aware of __parent__ pointers. This makes it unnecessary to use Acquisition mixin's for Zope 3 code to use them in Zope 2 code. The securit

[Zope-dev] Re: AQ-Parent branch test failues was: Re: Five and browser-oriented components

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: In my opinion, the fact that it accidentally worked as an instance variable isn't a very strong argument for continuing to support it. To me, this is a prime example of misusing a Five component

[Zope-dev] Re: Proposal: Merge philikon-aq branch into Zope trunk

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Hanno Schlichting wrote: Merging it into Zope trunk will get it into the Zope 2.12 release which is at this point not scheduled yet, but is unlikely to get a release before early 2009. This should give us plenty of time to test. This sounds good. Here&#

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2 eggification [was: Merge philikon-aq branch into Zope trunk]

Hi. Chris McDonough wrote: True, although the Zope2 instance-creation scripts will probably become setuptools console scripts, which means that things will likely need to get shuffled around a bit from how things are now regardless and old hands will be baffled anyway. repoze.zope2 needs the

[Zope-dev] Re: Proposal: Merge philikon-aq branch into Zope trunk

Hi. Hanno Schlichting wrote: I'd like to propose to merge the philikon-aq branch into Zope trunk aka Zope 2.12. [...] Timeline: I would like to do the merge as soon as possible, so people can easily test it against all their applications and report back problems. Just as a not

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope2 interfaces delenda est!

Tres Seaver wrote: I'd like to rip out the old Interface module from the 2.11 branch and the trunk, along with all the useless decoys which import it. THere is no *good* BBB reason to keep them around: anybody still depending on them in A.G. 2008 needs to switch over, anyway. Objections? I'll

[Zope-dev] Re: Proposal: Merge philikon-aq branch into Zope trunk

Hanno Schlichting wrote: Hanno Schlichting wrote: I'd like to propose to merge the philikon-aq branch into Zope trunk aka Zope 2.12. [...] Timeline: I would like to do the merge as soon as possible, so people can easily test it against all their applications and report back pro

[Zope-dev] Proposal: Deprecate GlobalTranslationService and FiveTranslationService

Hi. I'd like to propose to deprecate the Products.PageTemplates.GlobalTranslationService module and all custom translation handling from Products.Five. Rationale: In order to bring zope.i18n translation handling to the masses, some backwards compatibility code for PlacelessTranslationServic

[Zope-dev] Re: buildbot.zope.org?

Christian Theune wrote: On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:57:07AM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: Any idea what's wrong with Zope2.buildout? Looks like Acquisition is not built properly: http://zopebuildbot.whq.gocept.com/builders/Zope2.buildout/builds/75/steps/test/logs/stdio No idea, the egg it has is '

[Zope-dev] Re: buildbot.zope.org?

Hanno Schlichting wrote: Christian Theune wrote: On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:57:07AM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: Any idea what's wrong with Zope2.buildout? Looks like Acquisition is not built properly: http://zopebuildbot.whq.gocept.com/builders/Zope2.buildout/builds/75/steps/test/logs/

[Zope-dev] Re: zope.app.locales i18nmergeall.py not used anymore?

Christophe Combelles wrote: I think merging is not really done, and there are several changes to do for i18n: - split the "zope" gettext domain into all the separate namespaces. Maybe only zope.app.* packages can be kept under the "zope.app" domain. Just as a side note, I added a feature to

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope2 monitoring

Chris McDonough wrote: Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On Apr 30, 2008, at 12:41 , Christian Theune wrote: On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 12:16:53PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: I'm trying to figure out what the current state of the art for monitoring Zope2 processes is. Ideally I'ld want the equivalent of z

[Zope-dev] Re: New i18n locale extraction concept

Hi. Roger Ineichen wrote: I added a new package for extract i18n locales and I have some questions. Is it posible to split the zope.app.locales package into a package which offers the interfaces and classes e.g. PotMaker, the generic extract.py file and another one which provides the transla

[Zope-dev] Re: AW: AW: Re: AW: Re: AW: Re: New i18n locale extraction concept

Hi. Roger Ineichen wrote: Anyway, Since zcml is a default part of zope locale extraction it make no sense to me to not using a working setup for locale extraction. Grok? Does Grok not use zcml extraction? If not, we could probably change the z3c.recipe and disable the default zcml extractor.

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope2 porting Acquisition

Hi. ranjith kannikara wrote: I came across an error in module Acquisition, while trying to port zope2 to python2.5. There was a discussion over the same topic in JAN-2008. In acquisition the wrapper compare is returning false irrespective of the parameters. And the problem I stuck with was tha

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope2 porting Acquisition

Hi. Hanno Schlichting wrote: ranjith kannikara wrote: I came across an error in module Acquisition, while trying to port zope2 to python2.5. There was a discussion over the same topic in JAN-2008. In acquisition the wrapper compare is returning false irrespective of the parameters. And the

[Zope-dev] Re: setuptools extension for buildout old-style tar-balls?

Andreas Jung wrote: lots of old-style Zope products are now available as eggs. However a lot of people still don't work with buildout and need the old-style tar-balls. Does anyone know of a setuptools extension for generating and upload the tar-balls directly from a Products. package? Usin

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: z3c.pt/trunk/ In debug mode the actual source code for file templates is written out to a .source file, to make it easier to inspect it.

Tres Seaver wrote: Hanno Schlichting wrote: Log message for revision 87393: In debug mode the actual source code for file templates is written out to a .source file, to make it easier to inspect it. Make debug mode setting explicit in a config.py. Currently it is bound to Python&#

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: z3c.pt/trunk/ In debug mode the actual source code for file templates is written out to a .source file, to make it easier to inspect it.

Tres Seaver wrote: Malthe Borch wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: I don't think I would this to __debug__: I wouldn't want to pay a price either at startup time or (worse) at render time for information I don't need or want. Is ``devmode`` available on Zope 2? That might be a good flag to control thi

[Zope-dev] Re: Test runner: layers, subprocesses, and tear down

Hi. Benji York wrote: If you use zc.buildout, then you can try the branch by checking it out, adding a "develop" entry into your buildout config referencing it, and updating any version spec for zope.testing to "3.6dev". I'd really like third-party confirmation of the total test time reductions

[Zope-dev] Re: Product version number redundancy with version.txt and setup.py

Tim Hicks wrote: Am I right in thinking that there is a duplication of information in having an eggified product's version number stored in setup.py and version.txt? Having your setup.py read its version from version.txt is easy, if you don't want to update two places. I think the more inte

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 3 on Python 2.5, Zope 3 releases

Chris Withers wrote: Martin Aspeli wrote: Certainly, running Python 2.4 and Zope 2.10 compiled with mingw32 on Windows as per http://plone.org/documentation/tutorial/buildout has not given us any problems after a few months of using it. I would expect the above to work as *everything* is buil

[Zope-dev] Re: [Checkins] SVN: zope.i18n/branches/regebro-pluralsupport/src/zope/i18n/ Changed the API. It's unwieldy as it is, so better have separate methods

Hi. It's awesome to see some progress on this. You are aware of the Gettext manual at http://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/gettext.html#Plural-forms right? Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 16 July 2008, Lennart Regebro wrote: While talking about this, what would a ZPT implementatio

[Zope-dev] Re: [Checkins] SVN: zope.i18n/branches/regebro-pluralsupport/src/zope/i18n/ Changed the API. It's unwieldy as it is, so better have separate methods

Sorry. There's some garbage in my last message. Disregard the following bits. Hanno Schlichting wrote: You selected 5 out of 10 files. Can someone think about an example involving i18n:attributes? In TAL I cannot construct a dynamic one it seems. Hanno P.S. There isn't someo

[Zope-dev] Re: [Checkins] SVN: zope.i18n/branches/regebro-pluralsupport/src/zope/i18n/ Changed the API. It's unwieldy as it is, so better have separate methods

Lennart Regebro wrote: On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 22:36, Hanno Schlichting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You have to pay 6 dollars. In this case the underlying value is a simple integer, but the actual presentation might be locale dependent, like currency formatting. Ah. Yes, that&#x

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 3 on Python 2.5, Zope 3 releases

Chris Withers wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: Okay, so we can safely add Chris (and also Philipp) to the list of people maintaining our windows binary eggs. Awesome! Chris, do you think you can take it from here in getting an environment set up? Would be rgeat to have a bullet point list for how

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 3 on Python 2.5, Zope 3 releases

Chris Withers wrote: Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Would be rgeat to have a bullet point list for how to get a suitable environment set up given that I don't have mingw32 and have never used it before in my life :-S Like thi

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope2 porting failure in Products

Martijn Faassen wrote: On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:40 AM, ranjith kannikara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip] I hope the code for this assert (used in line "assert self.aq_base == self" ) is defined for zope and can be fixed with not so much effort. Can any one suggest where why these different v

[Zope-dev] New zope.interface 3.4.2 release

Hi. Would someone (Jim, Philikon, Fred) be willing to do a new zope.interface release or give me access rights on PyPi to do it myself? Thanks, Hanno ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No c

[Zope-dev] Re: New zope.interface 3.4.2 release

Fred Drake wrote: On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 7:36 AM, Hanno Schlichting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Would someone (Jim, Philikon, Fred) be willing to do a new zope.interface release or give me access rights on PyPi to do it myself? I've added Stephan Richter and Andreas Jung to the

Re: [Zope-dev] weird release of transaction module

Martijn Faassen wrote: > I just looked at the PyPI page of 'transaction': > > http://pypi.python.org/pypi/transaction > > And I see some weirdnesses: > > * it's called 'transaction 1.0a1' > > * the 'changes' claim however: > >1.0 (unreleased) > > What's up? Clearly something went wrong du

Re: [Zope-dev] zc.recipe.testrunner 1.1.0 requires zope.testing 3.6.0, but not released

Martijn Faassen wrote: > There appears to be a release of zc.recipe.testrunner 1.1.0 which > requires zope.testing 3.6.0, but zope.testing 3.6.0 was not released as > far as I can see. This means zc.recipe.testrunner 1.1.0 cannot be installed. http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.testing/3.6.0 This

Re: [Zope-dev] zc.recipe.testrunner 1.1.0 requires zope.testing 3.6.0, but not released

Andreas Jung wrote: > --On 4. September 2008 13:38:27 +0200 Martijn Faassen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> There appears to be a release of zc.recipe.testrunner 1.1.0 which >> requires zope.testing 3.6.0, but zope.testing 3.6.0 was not released as >> far as I can see. This means zc.recipe.testr

Re: [Zope-dev] zope.i18n dependencies

Wichert Akkerman wrote: > I was wondering why a non-zope project was pulling in zope.publisher and > ended up finding this chain: > > chameleon.core -> zope.i18n -> zope.component[zcml] -> zope.security -> > zope.location -> zope.traversing -> zope.publisher > > can we move the zcml component

Re: [Zope-dev] Adding broken/missing support to zope.interface?

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > Persistent component registries are not a good enough reason to add such > coupling (I'd be in favor of splitting support for persistent registries > out of zope.component, too, while we're at it). > > Let's put the "broken" support into code w

Re: [Zope-dev] Sanity Check on zope.sessions and Zope 2.12.x

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Jeff Rush wrote: > I'm chasing a problem when trying to use zope.sessions with Zope 2.12.x, and > I'm beginning to think that they are an incompatible mix of Zope2 and Zope3 > technologies. > > Can anyone confirm either way, so I know whether I'm wasting my time.

Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 6, OK: 33, UNKNOWN: 2

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: > On 04/19/2012 09:00 PM, Zope tests summarizer wrote: >> [2]    UNKNOWN UNKNOWN : winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64 >> https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-April/060786.html > > Ditto.  Maybe that box needs an intervention? Yep. There we

Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - OK: 34, UNKNOWN: 6

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Adam GROSZER wrote: > On 04/27/2012 02:58 PM, Patrick Gerken wrote: >> There still seem to be processes hanging on the windows boxes, >> unfortunately. > > restarted the whole box > if this happens again then something is wrong with the tests lately This happened

Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 1, OK: 37, UNKNOWN: 2

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Adam GROSZER wrote: > or why that package gets included Adding zc.sourcefactory to the ZTK was a conscious choice. It was popular and often used in "Zope 3"-style projects, maybe even part of core Grok and BlueBream. We could remove it from ZTK 1.2, but cannot jus

Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 122, OK: 33, UNKNOWN: 2

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > Can we please decomission the winbot until somebody has time to fix it? > The false negatives could be masking real problems. I tried to reproduce the problem manually on the winbot, but my remote connection died every 10 seconds - so after an

[Zope-dev] ZTK 1.0 lifetime

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:32 AM, Patrick Gerken wrote: > Well, the question is, is there still a need for ztk 1.0 tests? If so, > who are the consumers and for how long should we run the tests for > 1.0? Zope 2.13 is based on the ZTK 1.0. There's no version of Zope 2 that uses ZTK 1.1 and a poten

Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - OK: 41

On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > On 05/26/2012 09:00 PM, Zope tests summarizer wrote: > >> Non-OK results -- >> > Yay! Indeed! I updated the ZTK 1.0/1.1 branches to the latest respective bugfix releases. If the buildbots stay green, I'll tag new ZTK releases on

[Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 1.0.7 and 1.1.5 released

Hi. On behalf of the Zope Toolkit release team and the Zope community, I'm happy to announce the release of the Zope Toolkit 1.0.7 and 1.1.5. Both releases are minor bugfix releases. To use the new releases, you can use: [buildout] extends = http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.7/ztk

Re: [Zope-dev] using WSGIPublisher

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Paul J Stevens wrote: > FYI, I'm using the following buildout: > > https://github.com/pjstevns/plone.mongrel2 You are missing some required middleware for the current un-documented WSGI feature. I made an experiment quite a while back and came up with: https://git

Re: [Zope-dev] using WSGIPublisher

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > On 06/06/2012 12:11 PM, Hanno Schlichting wrote: >> I've looked into WSGI again at the Plone Symposium East sprint and I >> think we should remove the middleware approach again for Zope2. >> Primarily as we loose so

Re: [Zope-dev] zope.intid and zope.keyreference.interfaces.NotYet exception (patch)

On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman wrote: > At the end of this post, I pasted the diff from the current zope.intid > trunk against your "fork" on bitbucket. Maybe this would make it easier > for others to comment on it? It would be easier to read if you did the diff against the b

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope trunk: browser views

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 7:29 AM, yuppie wrote: > Zope 2 has customized implementations of the ``browser:view`` and > ``browser:page`` directives. I tried to make that code more similar to > zope.browserpage without breaking Zope 2 and CMF. I guess the biggest change > I made was removing the Five

Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: zc.buildout/ Moved to github

Please note that development of buildout 2 happens on github since April this year. The buildout developers decided to do the move after Jim suggested it. Legally you could see this move as a fork, but it was done by Jim and others. Alex just wanted to clarify the situation and also move the dev

Re: [Zope-dev] We need to change how code ownership works.

The Plone Foundation adopted a policy for this, see http://plone.org/foundation/materials/foundation-resolutions/patch-policy-052011 As we don't have any terms of service stating so for any of our issue trackers, we don't get any copyright assignments for reported bugs or proposed patches. Patc

Re: [Zope-dev] AccessControl bug fixed

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Yusei TAHARA wrote: > I found a bug in ZopeSecurityPolicy and fixed it. > > http://svn.zope.org/AccessControl/trunk/src/AccessControl/ZopeSecurityPolicy.py?rev=127548&r1=113657&r2=127548 > > Is it possible to release new version? I can do that. But is there any ch

Re: [Zope-dev] AccessControl bug fixed

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:23 PM, wrote: > does this have any security implications? In short: No. Long answer: Not unless you have very custom code similar to what's in the provided test (providing a custom rolesForPermissionOn callable on a class). And that code would have never worked as inte

Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 24, OK: 17, UNKNOWN: 2

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > That base class has been gone since ZConfig 2.9.2. I don't think the > Zope2 trunk has pinned / unpinned ZConfig in a long time, so I'm not sure > why it would just now break (ZConfig 2.9.2 was released in February, and > 2.9.3 in June). I up

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: Zope/branches/2.12/ LP #1047318: Tighten import restrictions for restricted code.

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:31 AM, yuppie wrote: > CMF uses some ZTUtils in restricted code: Batch, LazyFilter, make_query and > SimpleTreeMaker. The new Zope 2 releases (2.12.24 and 2.13.17) are not > compatible with existing CMF releases. Is this intended? This wasn't intended. > CMF could decl

Re: [Zope-dev] Small fix in Products.ZCTextIndex, how to go further?

Hi. The change looks ok. But I think you broke an optimization. IIRC the code compares the old and new values for the index, and skips the indexing step if they are the same. The typical item.reindexObject() call sents data for all indexes, even if just one or two them have changed. The optimizati

Re: [Zope-dev] Status of github migration

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Jens Vagelpohl > wrote: > > I did not choose to include or exclude any branch. The test migration > uses the package used to migrate most Plone packages from SVN to GitHub, > which uses svn2git underneath. If t

Re: [Zope-dev] Status of the buildout organization on github and a deleted branch

The buildout 1.6.x branch was renamed to "1". Jim discussed and announced that on the buildout-development list. Please follow-up on that list for buildout issues. Hanno On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Patrick Gerken wrote: > Hi, > > I thought I have was part of the buildout organization, but

Re: [Zope-dev] Changing id generation in OFS CopyContainer

Hi. Sorry, but 2.13 is in bug-fix-only mode. At least as long as I have to do the release management for it. Trunk is fair game, or up to Leonardo really. Hanno On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > I want to use INameChooser to select the id of copied content. This is >

Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK 2.0 process

Hi. The process for a ZTK 2.0 release isn't really well defined. I'm not sure if Jan-Wijbrand and Christophe are still interested in working on ZTK releases. Contrary to wait I said before I'd be willing to work on a ZTK 2.0 release (knowing the tools and procedure). My goals for a 2.0 release w

Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK 2.0 process

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Stephan Richter wrote: > Could you outline what the first step would be to create an alpha release list > for 2.0? We could manually include an sdist of the ZODB 4 py3 branch to make > the tests pass under Python 3. I'll have to look at the procedure again a bit.

Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK 2.0 process

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Sebastien Douche wrote: > 2. z3c.recipe.compattest and zc.recipe.testrunner doesn't work with Buildout > 2. Both do now. You currently need z3c.recipe.compattest from trunk though. I updated the ZTK trunk in the last days, and most of it should work under Python

Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 22, OK: 12, UNKNOWN: 2

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Marius Gedminas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:00:02AM +, Zope tests summarizer wrote: >> [3]UNKNOWN : Zope-trunk Python-2.6.8 : Linux >> [4]UNKNOWN : Zope-trunk Python-2.7.3 : Linux > > Something new: > > Zope-trunk Python-2.6.8 : Linux (x86_6

Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK 2.0: Deprecate zope.sequencesort

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Stephan Richter wrote: > I would like to deprecate zope.sequencesort in ZTK 2.0, since it cannot > properly ported to Python 3, since it depends heavily on the cmp() way of > sorting. I am also not a user of the package and I only tried to port the > package for co

Re: [Zope-dev] GitHub and Travis CI

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Stephan Richter wrote: > So my question is: What do we want to do? I would suggest E-mails on status > change should be sufficient. Cool, but please change the default email notification, it's set to "spam everyone all the time". See http://about.travis-ci.org/docs

[Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 1.0.8 and 1.1.6 released

Hi. On behalf of the Zope Toolkit release team and the Zope community, I'm happy to announce the release of the Zope Toolkit 1.0.8 and 1.1.6. Both releases are minor bugfix releases. To use the new releases, you can use: [buildout] extends = http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.8/ztk

[Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 2.0a1 released

Hi. I made a first alpha release of the current ZTK master, which technically just means there's a stable version file at: http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/2.0a1/ztk-versions.cfg and an overview page at: http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/releases/overview-2.0a1.html I hope this will h

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 4.0 roadmap & release plan

On Sat, Sep 14, 2013, at 0:38, Baiju M wrote: Is there any roadmap & release plan for Zope 4.0 ? I'm not aware on anyone still working on Zope 4. The project might come back to life at some point, but for the past couple of months it's been very quiet. At my work, we use Zope 2.12 and we are

Re: [Zope-dev] Repository for the zope mail summarizer

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:55 PM, Patrick Gerken wrote: > And who runs that script atm? Talk to testmaster Stefan Holek , stefan (at) epy dot co dot at He wrote the script and runs it. Hanno ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope

[Zope-dev] Zope 2.12.5 - this weekend

Hi. I'm planning to do a new Zope 2.12.5 release this weekend. Yvo is going to try to look some more into the unauthorized / exception view interaction and I hope to get a ZODB 3.9.5 release from Jim. If you have anything else you want to get in, commit away or let me know. Cheers, Hanno P.S.

Re: [Zope-dev] bug tracker gardening for bugday

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: > "Incomplete" is the auto-expiring state:  if nobody responds in 30 days, > it automatically disappears. > > I agree that we should at least attempt to reproduce even really old > bugs before assigning them 'wontfix' status (if we can't) or > 'i

Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK community packages

Hi. On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Christophe Combelles wrote: > I believe packages such as z3c.form, z3c.macro, z3c.template, z3c.pagelet (and > many others) are among the most important packages. I wonder why they are not > included in the ZTK? I always end up using them, I believe they shou

Re: [Zope-dev] I would like to have some releases

On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote: > OK, I started carefully with zope.interface 3.6.0. :) > > Source only so far. I have a Windows machine, and I could make Windows > releases as well, I guess. Is there any docs on what's needed for > that? I haven't built python extensions

Re: [Zope-dev] Version bump question? Bikeshed here.

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote: > I updated zc.receipe.testrunner to use zope.testrunner instead of > zope.testing.testrunner. Initial testing has shown that this should be > compatible, and although the code changes are minor, it's potentially > unexpected. So should we re

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >