Sorry, a DTML Method throws 'KeyError' not 'Unauthorized'
But I have already seen posts on why *that* is the case (Hotfix IIRC)
Stefan
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or
I am in the process of developing a product that patches the Folder class
at runtime - the Hotfix way. I append an additional tab to the Folder
class' manage_opions from the __init__.py of my product. While this works
fine for standard Folders and the Folder derived products I've tested,
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Steve Spicklemire wrote:
OK.. more details... this is definitely a PoPy issue...
I reinstalled ZPoPyDA, ran Zope in single threaded mode
( ./start -t 1 ) and then deleted my ZPoPyDA database adaptor.
Then I created a new one, connected to postgres, and tested it.
On Wed, 6 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know how to disable acqusition ?
That is, with a simple method, and not disabling the Acqusition class,
something like self.aq_disabled('attribute') .
Might this be what you are looking for?
http://www.egroups.com/message/zope/45049
On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Toby Dickenson wrote:
I have some old python modules which are generating messages from the
new python 2.1 warning framework. I can easily fix these modules,
however it has exposed a problem in Zope..
The warning framework tries to write to sys.stderr, and my Zope
At 01.02.2002 10:44 -0500, R. David Murray wrote:
You might also want to check out
http://www.zope.org/Members/TheJester/exUserFolder
--RDM
All,
Please have a look at my patch for XUF at
http://www.zope.org/Members/shh/Patches/exUserFolder-0.10.4.patch
I believe that
At 02.02.2002 08:08 +1000, Andrew Kenneth Milton wrote:
Since it seems this is going to occur repeatedly, having spent 10 seconds
looking at it, it seems that the 'correct' way is to call
self.Destination()._setObject()
so in essence self.Destination().__allow_groups__ will also get what we
At 06.02.2002 11:19 +1000, Brian Oliver wrote:
How does one receive a callback/create a hook that is called when an
attribute is changed, especially changed via the default property editor
for Zope objects (such that aquisition still works)?
I hope I did not misunderstand your problem but I
At 04.02.2002 21:10 +0100, Stefan H. Holek wrote:
At 02.02.2002 08:08 +1000, Andrew Kenneth Milton wrote:
Since it seems this is going to occur repeatedly, having spent 10 seconds
looking at it, it seems that the 'correct' way is to call
self.Destination()._setObject()
so in essence
At 09.04.2002 10:46 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
ZClasses are a waste of time, even more so than DTML.
Chris, please stop that dissing of ZClasses. They are *very* useful indeed!
No, not so much for the seasoned Python/Zope coder, but for the content
manager (remember, Zope is a CMS after
At 17.04.2002 10:57 -0400, Brian Lloyd wrote:
From the Zen of Python: Explicit is better than implicit.
We've been trying hard to adopt this bit of Zen. If you write
REQUEST.set, you can look at it and easily see what is happening.
Same with SESSION.set.
If you're looking at dtml-set... as a
On Wed, 1 May 2002, Dirk Datzert wrote:
We decide to install only one LDAPUserFolder in the Root-Folder and
configure him to do the authentications against LDAP.
In the subfolders we want to install 'LDAPUserFolders' which should not
be configured again, but use the top-level
--On Freitag, 10. Mai 2002 08:27 -0700 Andy McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But... when you restart Zope it recreates them all again for you :)
However you can delete the Examples and not have them come back ;)
I think it was Matt who pointed out to me that I could create harmless
substitute
I am in the process of modifying framework.py to support INSTANCE_HOME
installations of Zope. This involves
a) Honouring SOFTWARE_HOME when locating the Testing package
b) Adding the instance's Products and lib/python dirs to
Products.__path__ and sys.path respectively
You can look at a
I am quite positive that when you put
__refresh_module__ = 0
into your module it will not be refreshed.
Stefan
--On Freitag, 07. Juni 2002 21:37 +1000 Anthony Baxter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't yet finished of the CallProfiler bits, but it's a long weekend
here, and I plan to
I have failed as well to upgrade a Zope 2.5.1/ZEO 1.0 installation to
2.6.0a1. I tried to start *the very same instance* that runs successfully
under 2.5.1 with 2.6.0a1. This is what I found out:
* The Catalog problem you see comes from
Products.PluginIndexes.TextIndex.Splitter.ZopeSplitter
Hi All!
I believe I have found a leak in cAccessControl.c of Zope 2.5.1. See the
patch below. It was difficult to spot because in the respective section of
cAccessControl.c the 'owner' variable is reused several times. Note that
'ASSIGN' decrefs 'owner' before actually assigning, whereas the
Could be. ;-)
Does your problem go away when you put
export ZOPE_SECURITY_POLICY=PYTHON
in your start script?
Mine did. I would otherwise not have suspected cAccessControl.
Stefan
--On Donnerstag, 18. Juli 2002 13:28 -0700 Charlie Reiman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could this be related to
I do also see the ZPT expression stuff leaking. In my case in this order:
Products.PageTemplates.Expressions.SubPathExpr
Products.PageTemplates.Expressions.PathExpr
Products.PageTemplates.ZRPythonExpr.PythonExpr
This one does *not* go away when setting ZOPE_SECURITY_POLICY=PYTHON. I am
also
Same thing on Debian. 'Data.fs.in' is missing there as well. This is a
problem for me as the ZopeTestCase relies on a working Testing package and
error reports start to trickle in...
AFAIK, 'Data.fs.in' already contains things like the root Application
object and the Control_Panel. If no base
the
debian apt-get command...
---8---
Stefan
--On Mittwoch, 11. September 2002 10:49 -0400 Jim Penny
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 03:49:25PM +0200, Stefan H. Holek wrote:
Same thing on Debian. 'Data.fs.in' is missing there as well. This is a
problem for me as the ZopeTestCase
Matt,
You need Data.fs.in to run unit tests. The Testing package does not work
without it. See lib/python/Testing/custom_zodb.py.
Stefan
--On Mittwoch, 11. September 2002 16:25 -0400 Matthew T. Kromer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Johnson wrote:
Hi all,
I'm using win2k and
such a change would be necessary at all. If it is just
for the heck of it I politely ask to reconsider that decision. ;-)
TIA,
Stefan
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Stefan H. Holek wrote:
You need Data.fs.in to run unit tests. The Testing package does not work
without it. See
I have modified testrunner to support INSTANCE_HOME installations:
http://www.zope.org/Members/shh/TestRunner
To test an INSTANCE_HOME product specify the -i flag.
plug
This is in the collector as a feature+solution.
http://collector.zope.org/Zope/489.
/plug
Cheers,
Stefan
--On Donnerstag,
the ConflictErrors are raised. I
have added log messages to every single occurrence of raise ConflictError
in lib/python/ZODB/* but I never see any of them...
Stefan
--On Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 11:15 -0400 Jeremy Hylton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
SHH == Stefan H Holek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Chris!
You might want to take a look at my ZopeTestCase package. It supports Zope
security testing with users, roles, permissions and all.
http://www.zope.org/Members/shh/ZopeTestCase/
Also see the tests coming with the ReplaceSupport and DocFinderEverywhere
products. In essence
Yes, but AFAIK read conflicts mean that something has changed during a
read. I do not expect this to happen either...
Stefan
--On Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 07:54 -0400 Jens Vagelpohl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
conflict errors do not imply conflicting writes by definition. there is a
thing
I'd like to know what happened to this proposal:
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/WebServicesForZope/FrontPage
Is the WebServices package (CVS) working? Any technical reason why it was
discontinued?
Thanks,
Stefan
--
Those who write software only for pay should go hurt some other
It appears that when I currently do 'cvs co Zope' I get a version that
already requires Python 2.2.2. GvR's zdctl.py stuff uses lambdas in a way
that Python 2.1 does not grok.
How can I get at a Python 2.1.3 post 2.6.0 checkout?
Thanks,
Stefan
--
Those who write software only for pay should
Hi All!
My situation is this: When creating CPS sites I sometimes see one of the
tracebacks appended below.
In its factory method (manage_addCPSSite) CPS creates two External Methods
(cpsinstall cpsupdate) inside a fresh CMF portal, and then executes
these. During execution cpsupdate imports
Chris!
I am not using any mounted database. The factory method does not use
sessions either. I am still suspecting that doing imports from a factory
method sometimes gives me a strange _p_jar or something along that lines...
Still at loss where this foreign connection could come from.
Thanks,
Lars,
I believe that for security validation to work the object you return has to
be acquisition wrapped. Try something like (untested):
def _getOb(self, id):
return self._secretList[id].__of__(self)
HTH,
Stefan
--On Donnerstag, 16. Jänner 2003 16:51 +0100 Lars Heber
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You cannot rely on the Zope install script to handle add-on products well,
if at all. The same issue wrt .py extensions is present in the CMF skins.
So I guess the answer is: Don't do it that way. They are called add-on
products for a reason ;-)
Stefan
--On Donnerstag, 13. März 2003 14:00
This is definitely possible. You probably have a faulty factory method. In
Zope, construction is a two step process that looks something like
def addSomething(self, id, title=''):
ob = Something(id, title)
self._setObject(id, ob)
An ObjectManager must know the ids of its subobjects
On a related note let me say that absolute_url() is suffering from much the
same problem. Calling absolute_url(1) will give surprising results in the
presence of _vh_xyz!
I have already tried to make some noise about that but failed to
sufficiently make my point.
You should be able to put
export SUPPRESS_ACCESSRULE=1
into your start script, to disable existing access rules.
Stefan
--On Donnerstag, 17. Juli 2003 12:46 +0200 Hubert Muller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anybody knows how to restore acces to folder with bad written site access
rule ?
I have got about 7 DateTime refs on that one CMF site at the moment and
can arbitrarily increase this number by serving out pages ;-). They don't
stick though, but go back to a stable 4. No cause for alarm here.
Did you rebuild the catalog (-indexes) after the upgrade? New Zope versions
I am also very, very worried about breaking b/w compatibility in Zope 2.
I am responsible for about 15 sites, with say 10 distinct products
each. Are you saying I have to evaluate/upgrade 150 products because I
want to go to Zope 2.8(9)? No customer is going to pay for that effort
(and I will
DocFinderEverywhere may be useful to you.
http://www.zope.org/Members/shh/DocFinderEverywhere
Stefan
--On Mittwoch, 05. November 2003 12:57 +0100 Dmitrij Repp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I started to program for Zope and have found out, that
some commands in Python have been excluded. I miss
Make this:
userFolderAddUser('test', 'testpassword', ['Manager'], [])
Stefan
--On Mittwoch, 05. November 2003 17:46 +0100 Dmitrij Repp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I try to add user with Python. I do
container.acl_users.userFolderAddUser('test',
'testpassword', 'Manager',1).
The new user is
Hi Robert!
You can/should not muck with bobobase_modification_time. CMF 1.4 however
has this in DublinCore:
setModificationDate(self, modification_date=None)
Stefan
--On Dienstag, 02. Dezember 2003 15:58 +0100 robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi there,
I would like to set the last modified
Yuppie!
No, no and 3 times no! The fix was done by Evan and is CORRECT.
absolute_url () does not (and should not!) know anything about CMF or
portals or whatever else!
It MUST however return correct results in all possible VH situations and
this is what the fix addresses.
Please forget about
Evan,
absolute_url(1) was broken (by my definition of broken) basically since
the introduction of VHM, which means the better part of 2 years.
Naturally, there is code now that relies on this (broken) behavior.
This does however not mean it should not be fixed!
The ugly part is that the
After reading this paragraph for the third time I realized you have a
very good point here.
But
quote by=Evan Simpson
Relative in this context refers to the concept of a relative path
as used in rfc1808, not to a relationship with a Zope object. It is
meant for use in situations such as
After causing all this noise, let me summarize what I now understand is the
intended behavior of Zope's URL methods.
Given an object is accessed by
/VirtualHostBase/http/example.com:80/VirtualHostRoot/_vh_foo/folder/doc
1) doc.absolute_url()
Returns the full URL of doc including protocol and
Dario,
The best solution for me always has been to serve such files statically
from Apache, bypassing ZServer altogether. In fact I have added support for
static URLs to my version of ExtFile http://zope.org/Members/shh/ExtFile.
ZEO clusters will need a comon disk share (SAMBA, NFS) for this
[redirecting this to zope-dev]
Hi Sidnei,
On Freitag, Mär 12, 2004, at 19:39 Europe/Vienna, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
I just stumbled on a fancy one. MKCOL is protected by the 'Add
Folders' permission, which seems to be given only to Manager. This
completely prevents a member from creating a
I believe I have found an elegant way to stop 'import Testing' from
changing the INSTANCE_HOME.
Please see: http://zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1260
Stefan
--
The time has come to start talking about whether the emperor is as well
dressed as we are supposed to think he is. /Pete
I have made some small modifications to test.py to allow testing in
INSTANCE_HOMEs.
Please see: http://zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1279
An already patched version of test.py is available from here:
http://zope.org/Members/shh/TestRunner/test.py
Stefan
--
The time has come to start talking about
+0, not a problem. -1 for renaming 'Zope'.
I endorse the 'src/zope' idea.
Stefan
On Mittwoch, Apr 14, 2004, at 15:00 Europe/Vienna, Jim Fulton wrote:
Perhaps we can get more input on whether there's a problem.
A response with a positive sign (e.g. +1, +0, +2, ...) indicates
agreement that
Me too! :(
Strangely, it worked fine earlier today...
Stefan
On Mittwoch, Apr 28, 2004, at 21:01 Europe/Vienna, Jim Fulton wrote:
Hm, I can get to it from a machine outside of ZC or Zope.org.
Is anyone else haveing troubles getting to it?
Jim
--
The time has come to start talking about
I am under the impression that the ZOPE_CONFIG patch broke 2.7 branch.
Please see http://zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1233
Configuration is used very early, that's why I suggested to put the
logic into getConfiguration.
Zope tests fail for me, unfortunately Andreas cannot reproduce this.
Stefan
On
As BDBStorage has been removed from HEAD quite some time ago, I was
wondering whether it would be possible/advisable to remove it from 2.7
branch as well. Would it?
Stefan
--
The time has come to start talking about whether the emperor is as well
dressed as we are supposed to think he is.
ZPublisher can only fill in arguments it knows about, i.e. that are
mentioned in the script's signature.
Stefan
On Sonntag, Jun 6, 2004, at 01:16 Europe/Vienna, Marshall Powers wrote:
So what is the deal?
--
The time has come to start talking about whether the emperor is as well
dressed as we
Did you try to recompile the PythonScripts?
Stefan
On Mittwoch, Jun 30, 2004, at 18:52 Europe/Vienna, Chris Withers wrote:
I upgraded a Zope 2.6.2 site to 2.7.1.
Since then, the history tab of all my old Script(Python)'s is broken.
--
The time has come to start talking about whether the emperor is
Note that I found it to be relevant which object I want to acquire
(don't ask me why, though).
E.g. going back to my CMFDefault examples, I *can* acquire
portal_workflow and portal_url, but I can *not* acquire
portal_membership and acl_users from a denied context. Go figure.
If I change the
Note that 2.6.4 contains massive changes to the security
implementation. I'd imagine the product you use has not been updated
accordingly.
Stefan
On 13.10.2004, at 17:24, Nagarjuna G. wrote:
This product works perfectly till 2.6.3, starting from 2.6.4 and
upwards this problem appears. Looking
ZTUtils/__init__.py contains code like this:
if sys.modules.has_key('Zope'):
# import things
This is causing me repeated headaches when writing tests, because it
assumes/dictates a certain module import order. Can this go away,
please? I mean we know we are running Zope, don't we?
If
While testing a large-ish customer project under Zope 2.7.3 we found
that
when an object with setDefaultAccess('deny') is used as the context for
a PythonScript, the script can no longer aquire tools from the portal
root.
Because a test says more than a thousand words, I added one to
On 09.10.2004, at 18:04, Tres Seaver wrote:
*By definition*, anybody who has declared 'setDefaultAccess('deny')
*wants* the behavior you describe: that declaration says, unless I
give you explicit permission for using a name, refuse.
If Plone has classes which make such assertions, then either
Hi Tres!
On 22.10.2004, at 14:38, Tres Seaver wrote:
Given that the change was required to implement a security fix, and
without a reproducible test case for the reported breakage, I don't
think we can credit the rumors. We *definitely* don't want to defer
the security fix.
I still don't know
There is no bug, IMO. In CVS/SVN test.py lives in the root of Zope.
It just stays there when you make inplace or make instance (or make
anything for that matter). Removing it would break the checkout.
Stefan
On 18. Nov 2004, at 12:57, Lennart Regebro wrote:
Stefan H. Holek wrote:
+1 here too
Sorry Florent, I missed your warning mail.
I have two issues with the patch:
a) Trailing slash no longer works (--libdir Products/)
b) Some combinations of --libdir and --dir and symlinks no longer work
on Mac OS X (HFS)
Unfortunately os.getcwd() returns different paths in the presence of
This one does not even need symlinks (note that I run the tests from
Products):
localhost:/Users/zope/plone27/Products$ \
/Zope/bin/test.py -v -C ../etc/zope.conf --libdir . --dir CMFPlone
Running unit tests at level 1
Running unit tests from /Users/zope/plone27/Products/CMFPlone
Parsing
[docutils was moved from lib/python/docutils to
lib/python/third_party/docutils/docutils and an ugly sys.path hack
employed]
Why oh why do we always have to make it harder to start up Zope
(instead of making it simpler, for once)?
Extending the path in lib/python/sitecustomize only works if
In User.py the method is defined as
def getUserById(self, id, default=_marker):
try:
return self.getUser(id)
except:
if default is _marker: raise
return default
I am wondering whether anybody actually depends on the fact that
getUser is supposed to raise an
Hm, I'd rather not raise exceptions.
getUserById was introduced in Zope 2.2 and since then has never raised
anything. From what I can see it is used as a kind of alias for
getUser, expected to return None if the user does not exist.
So, my intention is to make 'default' work, not to make it
*sound of me protesting noisily*
Let me remind you of the Pope's decree:
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2004-November/024073.html
Stefan
On 16. Dez 2004, at 20:14, Andreas Jung wrote:
--On Donnerstag, 16. Dezember 2004 19:28 Uhr +0100 Christian Theune
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just for
I have restored test.py to the version shipping with Zope 2.7.3. The
changes made to accommodate Florent's use-case (adjacent symlinks)
broke some of mine. In particular, without calling realpath (or
abspath) on libdir, trailing slashes caused no tests to be found, as
did some combinations of
Seems docutils is not there just yet. I have added a test to
reStructuredText that tries to import the rst parser and it - gasp -
fails.
Stefan
--
The time has come to start talking about whether the emperor is as well
dressed as we are supposed to think he is. /Pete McBreen/
The bug:
http://zope.org/Collectors/CMF/259
The fix:
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-checkins/2004-August/028152.html
This effectively changes how acquisition works in restricted Python. I
understand this may well be the point wink.
The consequences:
Zope sites experiencing seemingly random
The failing AccessControl tests can now be found on shh-aqtests-branch
in zope.org CVS.
Observations:
a) guarded_getattr checks object security of the acquiree if the
container denies access (at least that's my assessment).
b) The tests pass when either
- running Zope 2.7.3, or
-
Tres,
I'd very much appreciate your opinion on
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2005-January/024237.html
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2005-January/024242.html
Plone is breaking left and right and I gotta do something about it...
Thanks,
Stefan
--
The time has come to start
Most excellent fix, thanks!
Stefan
On 14. Feb 2005, at 20:24, Jim Fulton wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Jim and I worked on an alternative fix today -- he will be checking it
in to your branch shortly, including modifying cAccessControl.
Done.
Jim
--
Software Engineering is Programming when you can't.
/lib/python/OFS/
Traversable.py, line 180, in unrestrictedTraverse
o = guarded_getattr(object, name, M)
AttributeError: manage_addFile
On 15. Feb 2005, at 21:29, Stefan H. Holek wrote:
Most excellent fix, thanks!
Stefan
On 14. Feb 2005, at 20:24, Jim Fulton wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Jim and I
This is due to how Python Scripts compute their cache keys. The
relevant snippet from PythonScript._exec() is:
asgns = self.getBindingAssignments()
name_context = asgns.getAssignedName('name_context', None)
if name_context:
keyset[name_context]
A TALES expression may be prohibitively expensive in any case, no
matter how simple it is kept. Please make sure to do some comparative
profiling. Cache keys are recomputed on every call of the script,
AFAICS. The thought of doing this in restricted Python makes my skin
crawl.
Stefan
Since r37701 zopectl test forks off a child process [1]. On OSX I
now reliably get a traceback tacked onto the end of every test report:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /Zope8/lib/python/Zope2/Startup/zopectl.py, line 312, in ?
main()
File
This change breaks Gadfly which doesn't seem to like 'null' at all. I
poked around in ZGadflyDA/gadfly a bit, but it's not obvious to me
how to fix the parser (*.mar files anyone?).
Stefan
[snip]
File /usr/local/Zope-2_8-branch/lib/python/Products/ZGadflyDA/
gadfly/kjParser.py, line
*Everything* you can do in the ZMI can be done from code. The ZMI is
not a magic entity, it uses the same APIs as everybody else. With
FSZSQLMethods you can stick max_rows: 0 into the lead-in comment, BTW.
Stefan
On 3. Nov 2005, at 03:37, Thanh Hải, Hà wrote:
My problem is I don't know
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
up with its own backward compatibility module though. See for example
CMFCore.utils.transaction or CMFPlone.transaction.
Yup, that box is slowly dying on me. I will take down the nightlies
until I find a new machine to run them on.
Stefan
On 14. Dez 2005, at 15:35, Chris McDonough wrote:
FYI: These tests appear to be failing due to a race in the tests
they're exercising that could be exposed if the machine
make install does currently not work on 2.9 branch and trunk. I am
told that this is because zpkg cannot do it. I am also told that
the tarball would support make install, just not the checkout. I
never use tarballs, so I don't know for sure.
I'd very much like to see the canonical
On 18. Dez 2005, at 17:58, Tim Peters wrote:
Nobody should be installing from a checkout to begin with, right?
Ok, so that's probably where we disagree then ;-)
I almost exclusively work with checkouts, and I would think many
developers (as opposed to users) do. Is there really no way to
AFAIK the default configuration used by tests does not have a dbtab.
See lib/python/App/config.py.
Stefan
On Jan 14, 2006, at 16:45, Florent Guillaume wrote:
I'll look at it.
Florent
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This failure is tie up with Florent's
This turned out to be a bug in FSPythonScripts (no __file__ in script
globals). Fixed on all branches of CMF = 1.5.
Cheers,
Stefan
On 13. Feb 2006, at 16:48, Julien Anguenot wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
Julien Anguenot wrote:
Tim Peters wrote:
[Julien Anguenot]
I'm having some
+1
I have handed systems with a thin ZClass layer on top to semi-
developers and they were *easily* able to take it from there. These
are people who would never have grokked (and bothered with) disk-
based Python development and all the mumbo-jumbo it entails.
No other system has anything
+1
On 27. Mär 2006, at 07:35, Andreas Jung wrote:
Zope 2.8 ships/shipped with Five 1.0 which is very old and no longer
actively maintained. Most ppl doing currently development with Zope
2.8
are using Five 1.2. Should we upgrade the Five version in Zope 2.8
to Five 1.2 to make their lives
I don't think makerequest is intended for wrapping anything but the
root application object. Putting the RequestContainer on arbitrary
objects doesn't feel right and certainly isn't how Zope does it, i.e.
you get a test fixture that doesn't reflect reality.
NotABug/WontFix ;-)
Stefan
On
This is an old ZODB, right?
ZGlobals is used by ZClasses. There used to be a time when ZGlobals
was still a BTree when it should have been a BTrees.BTree. Then some
migration code was added. I suppose the error comes from the fact
that BTree.so is now finally no longer part of Zope and
On 4. Apr 2006, at 16:53, Paul Winkler wrote:
Hmmm, but unit tests very often don't reflect reality -
deliberately!
Because reality is Too Much Stuff.
True enough.
Any other opinions on this? Do we really need to require an App at
the root any time we want to acquire REQUEST? That seems
The one in ZopeTestCase.utils is also meant to play with startZServer
(same module). I agree that the one in Testing.makerequest could
probably gain ACTUAL_URL, and maybe even the request._steps hack to
make URL1 and friends available...
However, I have not seen these URL vars used
On 4. Apr 2006, at 22:08, Paul Winkler wrote:
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 08:09:05PM +0200, Stefan H. Holek wrote:
This looks fine to me because the world ends at parent. Your earlier
example wrapped an object that was in the middle of an acquisition
chain (IIRC),
no, I think you invented
Out of curiosity, you know that SimpleItem does not have a
constructor? You just inherit the one from ExtensionClass.Base, which
accepts everything and subsequently ignores it. So your item will
have an empty id. This *may* be what you want so your physical path
starts with '' instead of
[We seem to have lost Steve Alexander's test summarizer. I will
contact him in a separate mail.]
The switch to Python 2.3.4 caused tests for Zope 2.7 and 2.8 to
experience a funny problem with the logging module. Anybody want to
take a guess what's up here? I know these are not a truly
For the record: I am still opposed to this change. It basically
endows the request (as in self.REQUEST) with a getPhysicalPath
method, and I have no idea what kind of side-effects this may have.
AFAICS your test suite is the only suite around that wants to request-
wrap non-root objects.
http://www.zope.org/Members/4am/debugspinningzope
On 18. Apr 2006, at 16:45, Morten W. Petersen wrote:
Hi,
I have a problem with a Zope that hangs eating up 99.9% of the CPU.
I've tried to debug the problem by using DeadlockDebugger but that
doesn't even return when accessing it.
I guess the
Note that Zope2.app() opens a new ZODB connection which you need to
close at some point. I suggest something along the lines of:
app = Zope2.app()
try:
products = app.Control_Panel.Products
...
finally:
app._p_jar.close()
You have to copy or symlink your Products directory into the ZEO
instance. At least those Products it tries to load for conflict
resolution.
HTH,
Stefan
On 2. Jun 2006, at 10:21, M. Krainer wrote:
How can I teach the zeo server to lookup my Products dir to resolve
the
conflict?
--
-1
The whole point of sticking with Zope2 is backward compatibility,
isn't it? If I wanted something that doesn't run my old products and
applications anymore I would go to Zope3 directly, why thank you.
Please keep this in mind in your spree to make Zope2 look like Zope3.
Backward
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
