fix their
applications.
I suggest we make aliases and generate deprecation warnings if
whrandom is used. (The later may be tricky, I realize.)
Maybe for now, just make aliases and move on. :)
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540
could throw away
this check out and start over. A simpler thing you could do is to
remove the zope directory and do an svn up. Since we switched to
using externals, we see lots of things like this. You just learn to delete
the directories in question.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL
anything except the entire
test suite,
That's odd. What did you try?
As others have suggested, you should use -h to get help on the many
options. I've tried to make the new test runner backward compatible
with the old, but some old options are no longer supported.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
of the Zope 2 development process, so why run their tests?
I then realized that this applies to all of the zope package. Perhaps
I should exclude the zope package as well. Or perhaps we shouldn't
exclude anything by default.
Thoughts?
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
, we all really appreciate all of the great work you've done on getting
Five 1.3 done and on getting Z3.2 into Z2!
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http
.
It would be great if someone would sort this out before
we do any Zope 2.9 releases. :)
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-11-1 17:28 -0500:
...
I have configured the test runner to exclude tests for ZConfig, BTrees,
persistent, ThreadedAsync, transaction, ZEO, ZODB, ZopeUndo, zdaemon,
and zope.testing. My reasoning for excluding these by default
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
We need to stitch zope.app into Zope 2 more carefully than we
are now. Much of what we are stitching is unreleased in Zope3
and depends on things not stitched nto Zope 2.
Among other things, this means that we can't use
python2.4 test.py
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
What changes are those? A fresh Zope trunk checkout works for me. Here's
what I did:
$ svn co svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/repos/main/Zope/trunk
Zope-trunk
$ cd Zope-trunk
$ ./configure
$ make
That worked for me (though I usually don't do
Lennart Regebro wrote:
On 11/4/05, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having said that, I don't really like the configure/make farce myself.
Farce?
We aren't running the real configure. We aren't really using make.
We're just using make as a wrapper around setup.py.
I'd be happy
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 4. November 2005 11:27:10 -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most people who download Zope 2 are not Python programmers. Many of them
become Python programmers later. I think this is a big part of Zope 2's
value proposition that we haven't matched in Zope 3
use the templates domain when inserting data
via tal:content. Note however, if the tal expression results in the use of the
template's example text, the templates domain should be used.
Thoughts?
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:21:08AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
This is a reminder that there will be a feature freeze for the December
Zope releases on November 1.
OK. I thought there was going to be a 2.9 branch by now,
but I don't see one. Is the trunk totally frozen
--
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 - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday 13 November 2005 10:48, Jim Fulton wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
I suspect there's just some miscommunication about who is actually
supposed to make the branch. I have just gone ahead and made it.
But yes, now that there is one, the 2.9 branch is frozen
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 12:38 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 11:26 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Sunday 13 November 2005 10:48, Jim Fulton wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
I suspect there's just some miscommunication about who is actually
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 15:20 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 21:07 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:
Branches aka new features should be merged into the
HEAD if they are considered to be stable. The reason for this approach but
be to have the HEAD in a reasonable stable state
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 14:55 -0500, Chris McDonough wrote:
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 17:32 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:
...
Also, it sounds as if there's an argument being made that *everyone*
should pitch in to get 2.9 beta out the door *instead* of committing
Zope 2 feature work and the delayed
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 19:05 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:21:08AM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
This is a reminder that there will be a feature freeze for the December
Zope
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 19:20 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
...
Note that of all the recent changes, I would jettison zpkg-based builds
*first* if our timebox is at risk; I certainly wouldn't agree with
leaving the trunk frozen due to issues with a *very* recently-proposed
change which provides no
Dang, that's embarassing. Thanks Tres!
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 23:43 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark Hammond wrote:
Not on Windows:
Windows test failures on Zope trunk
http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1931
CMF-trunk runs fine
On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 10:22 -0500, Tim Peters wrote:
...
Turns out the Five tests that were failing on Windows also fail on
Linux, but the failing tests don't run unless you pass ``--all`` to
test.py (which I normally do, but I guess most people don't, in which
case most people wouldn't see
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 00:20 +0800, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
BTW I'm for removing the 2.9 branch for now.
You didn't, so I presume 2.9 branch stays? It's important to clear the
status of this branch because bugfixes need to be merged to it (see my
email
On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 19:47 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 14. November 2005 14:25:17 -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 00:20 +0800, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
BTW I'm for removing the 2.9 branch for now.
You didn't, so
breaks on the Zope trunk, where you have to pass the module
pattern as an option rather than an argument:
$ bin/zopectl test -m MyProduct
You can still pass a module pattern and a test pattern as positional
arguments. This is for backward compatibility.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto
Cool, thanks!
Jim
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
FWIW:
Alot. :)
$ pwd
/home/tseaver/projects/Zope-CVS/Zope-2_8-branch
$ find . -name *.py | grep -v build-base | xargs grep
Wrapper_findattr
and not taking care of the new reference, then it is not surprizing that
you have a leak.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http
connection between the Zope 2 world and the Zope 3 world.
+100
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
a bridge? ;)
This is an age old argument made when someone wants to add a new
feature to a development system. It is patently false.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http
. Wow, what a huge number of messages in a day. :)
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org
independent functional tests.
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
and applications
being built by Canonical.
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
in this direction?
It (or Zope 2 development in general, which is becoming indistinguishable
from Five) is going in this direction.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http
which will give us
at least some consequence.
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
Christian Theune wrote:
Hi,
Am Freitag, den 02.12.2005, 10:03 -0500 schrieb Jim Fulton:
Christian Theune wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 30.11.2005, 15:52 +0100 schrieb Philipp von
Weitershausen:
From where I'm standing, with Zope 2.8.4 it's as safe as with Zope 2.9
(which actually *requires
Zope 3 seems to ve ready for a beta release. Does that mean Zope 2
is ready?
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
Andreas Jung wrote:
Just to let you know: Zope 2.9 b1 will be released together with Zope
3.2 b1
this Wednesday..so the last changes and fixes should be done until
Wednesday morning.
I'm going to try to get a 3.2 beta out today.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
. I'm outside
svn+ssh access
range right now, so either you do it, Andreas, or you wait until I'm at home in
about 5
hours.
I agree, this should be doen for this release.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
This is a very recent problem and a result of Jim's inconsistent
handling of the version.txt matter yesterday.
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/MakingARelease says that
zope.app/version.txt should be created on a tag and
zope.app/PACKAGE.cfg
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
...
Buildbot is awesome and Stephan's suggestion is a excellent one.
However, I consider buildbot a good safety-belt, not more. It's
definitely not an excuse for not testing things properly in a local
sandbox before checking in.
There's
. (This is even true for English. Generally,
users prefer to see text sorted without regard to case.)
A proposal to address this problem is here:
http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/LocaleSpecificTextCollation
Comments are welcome.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO
--
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 - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http
?
import transaction
...
transaction.commit()
transaction.abort()
Although I think the old way should still work. If it doesn't,
please report a bug.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
or CMFPlone.transaction.
I'm dispayed to hear this. :( The old use of __builtins__.get_transaction
should be deprecated and supported for a period of time. If it isn't, then this
is *definately* a bug.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 11. Dezember 2005 12:28:04 -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefan H. Holek wrote:
import transaction
transaction.get()
transaction.commit()
transaction.abort()
transaction.savepoint()
This works since 2.8, but not in 2.7. Nearly every project has come
Tim Peters wrote:
[Jim Fulton]
...
BTW, This is a good example for why I want to start using time-based
deprecation.
In a world with time-based releases, is there a difference?
Yes, because release numbers aren't very helpful when software
is used by many applications. For example, I
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I forgot a very important need:
- Common approach to Unicode
In particular, In Zope 3, all text is stored and managed as Unicode.
The publisher decodes request data and encodes response data. The vast
majority of application and library code can
is more pronounced
for ZEO storage servers.
Production Zope and ZEO servers should run with -O IMO.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 06:50:19AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| There is a drawback: Debugging becomes a lot harder and sometimes
| impossible because you get no or faulty line number information in
| tracebacks and when using pdb.
|
| That isn't true. Line numbers
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 19 Dec 2005, at 12:23, Andreas Jung wrote:
I get always connection closed unexpectedly when using svn update.
Andreas
That %$£@ BerkeleyDB backend was geborken again. svnadmin recover fixed
it.
Thanks!
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
process. Even a simple option to run
tests by number would probably help a lot, making a manual binary search
pretty easy.)
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http
we can
get all dicts to be sorted.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org
instead of on
the keys themselves.
That wouldn't be bad.
Anyway, I guess we should make an issue of this on python-dev,
so that either we can count on documented behavior
going forward or so that we write our pwn pretty printer for
use in doctest.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
Tim Peters wrote:
...
Well, I understand why that works, but it's not part of pprint's
contract either.
What contract. :)
The documented behavior, e.g. from '$ pydoc pprint' or the online
equivalent
that
this will take several hours. This involves scheduled downtime,
testing, dealing with the inevitable misshap
I expect the Zope Foundation will probably establish a new repository.
That would probably be a good time to make the switch.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 19 Dec 2005, at 20:02, Jim Fulton wrote:
Rocky Burt wrote:
Perhaps the backend should be switched from bdb to fsfs (native
subversion backend type) ? I know it does away with a lot of these,
issues.
Yup, when someone has time to do it. AFAIK, it will involve
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 19 Dec 2005, at 21:27, Jim Fulton wrote:
IMHO the process is straightforward and easy (except for the time
it will take),
That fact alone adds complication, as that down time needs to be
scheduled.
OK, well, the only complication is setting a date really
the cats and come up with
a time frame where this can be done, and communicating it. I'll do
everything on the technical side. Sound like a deal?
P.S.: The best time for me is between 12/25 and 12/30 since I'll be at
home in Germany.
Pick a date and I'll propose it.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 19 Dec 2005, at 21:44, Jim Fulton wrote:
Umh, more like force-volunteered now ;) Which is fine, but in
return I'd like someone else (maybe you?) to herd the cats and
come up with a time frame where this can be done, and
communicating it. I'll do everything
Jens Vagelpihl has graciously offered to convert the subversion
repository to use a file-system back end.
The repsository will be inaccessable for some portion of
December 25.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714
Jim Fulton wrote:
Jens Vagelpihl has graciously offered to convert the subversion
repository to use a file-system back end.
Jim groans, That's Jens Vagelpohl.
Thanks again Jens!
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 19 Dec 2005, at 22:08, Jim Fulton wrote:
Sounds good. I'll announce that the repo will be down for maintenance
on the 25th,
Just FYI, during a dry run this morning I hit an obvious snag: The
subversion packages on svn.zope.org are so ancient that they cannot
I'm going to go ahead with this update in hopes of resolving some
windows client problems that may be confounding our efforts to
run windows tests with buildbot.
Jim
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 19 Dec 2005, at 22:08, Jim Fulton wrote:
Sounds good. I'll announce that the repo will be down
Jim Fulton wrote:
I'm going to go ahead with this update in hopes of resolving some
windows client problems that may be confounding our efforts to
run windows tests with buildbot.
Done
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
Does that mean you're doing it? All necessary RPMs are on the box at /
root/svnupgrade/. Otherwise I can do it tomorrow morning (about 5 AM EST)
Yes, already done. They are also available in my home directory. :)
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
it work. Question is, is it worth
delaying the release? I don't know.
If we did stay with the current situation, we'd need to cleanup the
documentation so that a developer can easily reminder herself
what she can do and how to do it.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Andrew Sawyers wrote:
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 13:47 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
I'll note, FWIW, that we don't do installs from Zope 3 checkouts.
I think it's worth asking whether this is an important requirement.
If it is, then we should make it work. Question is, is it worth
delaying
an unreleased version of Zope
because they need some feature or bug fix that hasn't been
released yet.
Can anyone think of other use cases?
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
[snip]
I'll note, FWIW, that we don't do installs from Zope 3 checkouts.
Yes, this is understood.
I think it's worth asking whether this is an important requirement.
Perhaps more generally, how important
Martijn Faassen wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I'll note that, as a developer, I have never done this and probably
never would want to do this.
How do you test 'mkzopeinstance' then? Build a release first? That's
rather cumbersome. Anyway, small point.
In Zope3, I use bin/mkzopeinstance
made including Zope 3 in Zope 2 a real mess.
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
to make releases. It hasn't really
been adequately rethought to support checkouts. As a result we've
had to make some compromises.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http
but it evidently
didn't register for me.
The tar ball looks the same (wrt configure/make/make install).
It's the checkout that has changed.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope
Martijn Faassen wrote:
We should probably be holding this discussion later,
not right now, though.
Please. :)
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http
/test/Zope3/trunk.
I encourage people to check it out. One thing I noticed
is that I can't commit any changes. I imagine that the
group needs write access to some directory or files that
it doesn't have write access to now.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 23 Dec 2005, at 14:57, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 23 Dec 2005, at 14:48, Jim Fulton wrote:
Jim, if you want to take a look at this new repository, it's under
/ root/fakesvn.
I moved this to the normal repos area and changed the group to
the zopesvn, so
of the
project.
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 - Zope-Dev
since the outstanding work for the 3.2 beta would not affect Zope 2.
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
the database, like
is done for Python Scripts recompiling for instance. Or I can call it
myself in my upgrade procedures on the exact objects I know will need
updates.
Perhaps we can use the generations framework.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO
created by SVN too.
Overall, I like tags better myself:
- They're self-documenting.
Yes if they are real tags. I don't think adds much documentation is created
soley
so that something else can have a tag in an external.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered
away from zLOG, as we want to leverage
the standard logging framework.
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
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 16. Januar 2006 13:08:31 -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll just note that:
- I agree with your point about deprecation warnings. IOW
we should not check in new deprecation warnings on the trunk
that cause warnings to be output when running
will be formed during this next release cycle,
I think this is a good time to take stock and think about how to move
forward,
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:36:35AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| And then there are the Windows releases. Making Zope 2 windows releases
| is very painful and there don't seem to be many people willing to help.
| We've avoided the pain for Zope 3 by being less ambitious. We
that *I* can do it. This means that the process should
be simple and well documented enough that someone like me can follow it
without thinking. Thinking is hard.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http
it will be more important
to get the feature releases right.
Of course, this required commitment from the community.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:27:25AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| The installers do not require much Windows expertise. In fact, they
| require a lot of 'makefile' expertise right now, and some Inno Setup
| expertise, not much else.
|
| Sorry, Inno Setup is a windows
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:45:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| People up to now have come up with systems like this that they thought were
| automated enough. That's why we don't have a 2.9 release for windows.
What about we turn that around. How would you describe
distutils to MSI.
Except that the same sort of problems occurred with 2.8.
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
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:46:33AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| ...
| | As I said before, the fact that we don't have a windows release
| | is proof that the process isn't automated enough.
|
| That's not a proof that the process is not automated
.
The code that Five is using will still be available, but it will be
somewhere else (with necessary backward compatibility hacks).
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http
-- and development is great. I think
eggs are a lot farther along that zpkg. (Eggs weren't around when we started
zpkg.) If eggs work out, as I hope they will, I'd like to stop work on
zpkg and just use eggs.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:09, Jim Fulton wrote:
You know my position concerning the repository and the release; I'd
prefer them to be kept as similar as possible to simplify the release
process. I hope we can go in that direction. It also makes things more
they don't and may never
use. I want Five/Zope2 to not *have* to include packages they don't
need just because we've created monoliths. I especially don't want
to release experimental code through Five/Zope2 just because we don't
have our repository and/or packaging in order.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
less. I think a more powerful
packaging architecture will make it easeir to include what we want.
Deciding what we want is another issue.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation
you know they won't? Obviously not.
I suggest we reserve jusdgement until we have had an opportunity for
some prototyping. Based on what I've seen so far, I'm very hopeful.
And then there's the fact that they come from a much wider community
than just Zope.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday 19 January 2006 07:00, Jim Fulton wrote:
I feel like an old record, but please
let's keep the development process as simple as possible. I rather make
some concessions to the packaging and dependency system than spending
more time developing.
Perhaps
to it, we
usually need a newer version than is available in the Python release we're
using.
If Python had and used a packaging system, like eggs, this wouldn't be
necessary.
Someday.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714
Chris Withers wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
If Python had and used a packaging system, like eggs, this wouldn't be
necessary.
Someday.
*grinz*
The irony that python is so successfuly _because_ of it's batteries
included nature isn't lost on me ;-)
I would argue that it is successful
release is scheduled for May and
the next feature freeze is April 1.
- We will support deprecated features for 1 year.
I consider there to be decisions. :)
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714http
301 - 400 of 1043 matches
Mail list logo
