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

2013-09-16 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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 looking forward to upgrading
  to Zope 2.13. Depending on Zope 4.0 availability, we can think about
  directly moving to Zope 4.0

Zope 2.13 should be an easy upgrade. You can also selectively upgrade
to DateTime 3 (huge memory savings) and Products.ZCatalog 3 (support
for not queries and sort_on with multiple indexes).



Note that security support for Zope 2.12 (and Python 2.6) ends in
October, so upgrading is a good idea.



Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2013-05-01 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.8/zopeapp-versions.cfg

Updated versions:
[name = old - new]

distribute = 0.6.27 - 0.6.36
pytz = 2012c - 2013b
mr.developer = 1.18 - 1.25
zc.buildout = 1.4.4 - 1.7.1
zc.lockfile = 1.0.0 - 1.0.2
zc.recipe.egg = 1.2.2 - 1.3.2
zdaemon = 2.0.4 - 2.0.7
zope.app.i18n = 3.6.3 - 3.6.4
zope.file = 0.6.1 - 0.6.2
zope.tales = 3.5.2 - 3.5.3

or:

[buildout]
extends =
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.6/ztk-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.6/zopeapp-versions.cfg

Updated versions:
[name = old - new]

distribute = 0.6.27 - 0.6.36
pytz = 2012c - 2013b
mr.developer = 1.18 - 1.25
zc.buildout = 1.5.2 - 1.7.1
zc.lockfile = 1.0.0 - 1.0.2
zdaemon = 2.0.4 - 2.0.7
zope.annotation = 3.5.0 - 3.6.0
zope.app.i18n = 3.6.3 - 3.6.4
zope.tales = 3.5.2 - 3.5.3


Kind regards,
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 2.0a1 released

2013-05-01 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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 help people test their applications against it and
provide a first stepping stone to a feature freeze.

Currently the release claims compatibility with Python 2.6, 2.7 and
3.3, though the 3.3 support is pending the ZODB decisions.

Things that we'll need before we can call this beta:

- Release final 4.x versions for all the libraries that currently only
have an alpha release
- Wait on the ZODB decision, from a ZTK perspective we can live with
partial Python 3 support (as we don't provide it for RestrictedPython
either)
- Hope Tres gets bored and makes more libraries compatible with Python 3.2
- Preferably wait for some feedback from BlueBream / Grok / Zope 2
developers and their tests
- Decide what to do with the missing Python 3 toolchain libraries like
Paste, zc.resourcelibrary (as noted in a section in the versions file)

Cheers,
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] GitHub and Travis CI

2013-03-04 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Stephan Richter
stephan.rich...@gmail.com 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/user/notifications/#Notifications

So until we have a good policy, please use:

notifications:
  email: false

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2013-02-28 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as 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_64)

 Running ./bin/alltests --all
 /home/stefan/autotest/zope_runtests_4.sh: line 13: ./bin/alltests: No 
 such file or directory

 Zope moved to github, I guess.  Somebody ping the owners of
 zope-te...@epy.co.at please.

I mailed Stefan Holek in private - might take some days for him to
have time to do something.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2013-02-28 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Stephan Richter
stephan.rich...@gmail.com 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 completeness sake.

Thx for trying.

I'd be fine to drop it from the ZTK - Zope depends on it, but that
just means it falls under their responsibility to maintain it. I think
Grok never used it - so it fails the two users rule.

In the same way, I think we should remove RestrictedPython and
zope.untrustedpython from the ZTK. Since those are also very much
dependencies of Zope alone and porting is going to be a very
challenging task.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK 2.0 process

2013-02-27 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Sebastien Douche sdou...@gmail.com 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 3.3 now.

To test do:

svn co svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/zopetoolkit/trunk ztk-trunk
cd ztk-trunk
python3.3 bootstrap.py
bin/buildout
bin/test-ztk

Locally I get test failures for 10 packages - since not all are ported
yet. But the overall buildout and test infrastructure works. Note that
this is pulling in ZODB, ZEO and the compattest recipe from Git/SVN
via mr.developers auto-checkout option. For everything else it uses
(alpha) releases. If you want to test the master of every package, you
have to run bin/buildout -c development.cfg.

 Can you tell me what is missing or deprecated in this list ?
 https://github.com/sdouche/zopetoolkit-py3.3/blob/master/ztk.cfg

Best check back against the canonical file in SVN as mentioned above.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK 2.0 process

2013-02-26 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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 would be (comparing to
http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/releases/overview-1.1.html):

- Drop support for Python 2.5 (ZTK 1.1 still supports that)
- Add support for Python 3.x (either 3.3 or 3.2 and 3.3)
- Drop all zope.app packages from the KGS (most were deprecated in ZTK 1.1)
- Update to buildout 2
- Update to ZODB 4

Hanno

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Stephan Richter
stephan.rich...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi everyone,

 what is the process to start working on ZTK 2.0? We are about 5-6 packages
 away from porting ZTK to Python 3 and I would like to start working on a new
 release.

 Regards,
 Stephan
 --
 Entrepreneur and Software Geek
 Google me. Zope Stephan Richter
 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
 (Related lists -
  https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] ZTK 2.0 process

2013-02-26 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Stephan Richter
stephan.rich...@gmail.com 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. Will do so in the next
days and start updating svn.zope.org/repos/main/zopetoolkit/trunk

 - Drop all zope.app packages from the KGS (most were deprecated in ZTK 1.1)

 Some of the zope.app packages (the ones not deprecated) should stay or simply
 be renamed to not being called zope.app.*.

Our rule for inclusion in the ZTK is: Whatever library is used by at
least two out of the three frameworks (BlueBream, Grok, Zope).

Given that BlueBream hasn't seen any release beyond a 1.0 about two
years back, I'm not sure it's active or relevant anymore. Grok isn't
seeing frequent releases, but there was a 1.5.5 mid last year.

If you compare the version list from the last ZTK 1.1.5
(http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.5/zopeapp-versions.cfg)
and Grok 1.5.5 (http://grok.zope.org/releaseinfo/1.5.5/versions.cfg),
you'll notice that Grok already overwrites the version requirement for
half of the non-deprecated packages with its own versions. And as I
said, Zope isn't using any of them anymore for a long time.

So I don't see any value in testing and promising stability for those
zope.app packages, when there aren't any shared consumers for the
specific versions.

And the actually used versions by Grok are:
zope.app.applicationcontrol, zope.app.appsetup, zope.app.debug -
renaming those to a non zope.app prefix doesn't make a lot of sense
for me either - as they are all about a specific app server
configuration and not generally reusable libraries.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2013-01-11 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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 do3cc...@googlemail.comwrote:

 Hi,

 I thought I have was part of the buildout organization, but I am not now.
 I noticed because I wanted to recreate a branch that went missing.

 Could I either get commit access or could somebody recreate the 1.6.x
 branch. There is a buildout extension that breaks because of the missing
 branch.

 There seems to be no way to identify where exactly the branch was deleted,
 but the last mention of the branch is
 ef8c5e2a0d689e88e2a038f8346259e631956a1f

 Committed by Adam. I don't know if that was a merge that removed the
 branch or not, but as a starting point for a resurrected 1.6.x branch it
 seems bo ge good enough

 Best regards,

Patrick

 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
 (Related lists -
  https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2013-01-11 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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 wich...@wiggy.net wrote:

 I want to use INameChooser to select the id of copied content. This is
 currently not possible since manage_pasteObject does not pass the object to
 be pasted to _get_id. I added a new wichert-ofs-paste-naming branch to
 extend _get_id to make that possible. Are there any objections to merging
 that change to 2.13 and trunk?

 Wichert.
 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
 (Related lists -
  https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Status of github migration

2013-01-10 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Jim Fulton j...@zope.com wrote:

 On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Jens Vagelpohl j...@dataflake.org
 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 there's whole branches missing the
 migration has obviously failed.

 I had a bunch of problems with ZODB and the ruby svn2git.


If you used a ruby tool, then you didn't use the same one as the Plone
migrations. Unfortunately there's at least two different tools named
svn2git. The one used by the Plone migrations is from the KDE community and
written in Qt. Some of the more useful info is at
http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/MoveToGit/UsingSvn2Git

That tool doesn't really use git-svn. Instead it scan through all SVN
revisions, looks at the changed paths and matches those against a ruleset.
So you can tell it that both /foo/bar/trunk and /bar/trunk contain code
that goes into the final bar.git repo. Since you can manually influence
these rules, this tool tends to work better on projects which have moved
their location in SVN a lot. It also does a single scan through the entire
SVN repo and is able to generate many resulting git projects at once. Which
made it perfect for a mass-migration.

git-svn or tools based on it, tend to work well on small projects that
always stayed in the same place, with the same structure.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-11-14 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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 optimization
made sure to skip any extra work, if there wasn't really any change for the
text index. Without that check, you end up updating and writing a bunch of
internal data structures in the text index every time. Those lead to slower
write performance and more conflict errors.

Could you have another look, and see if you can preserve the optimization?

Thanks,
Hanno


On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Gauthier Bastien gauth...@imio.be wrote:

  Hi everybody,

 I made a small change in the current Products.ZCTextIndex product, the
 change can be saw here :


 http://svn.zope.org/Products.ZCTextIndex/trunk/src/Products/ZCTextIndex/ZCTextIndex.py?rev=128273sortby=logr2=128273r1=113689

 and I added a test here :


 http://svn.zope.org/Products.ZCTextIndex/trunk/src/Products/ZCTextIndex/tests/testZCTextIndex.py?rev=128273sortby=logr2=128273r1=113689

 This fixes ticket : https://dev.plone.org/ticket/13310 : while
 reindexing, if the new content is empty, the index is not reindexed and the
 last indexed value is kept.

 I just wonder if it was the way to go, and if it was and if a reviewer can
 confirm that changes are OK, what to do to release a new version because
 this is a huge bug for us...

 Thank you and have a nice end of day,

 --

  Gauthier Bastien
 Support IMIO - CommunesPlone
 rue de la Vieille Sambre 34
 5190 Mornimont
 Tél: +32(0)71 780979

   Disclaimer

 Les informations contenues dans ce courrier électronique (annexes
 incluses) sont confidentielles et réservées à l'usage exclusif des
 destinataires repris ci-dessus. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire, soyez
 informé par la présente que vous ne pouvez ni divulguer, ni reproduire, ni
 faire usage de ces informations pour vous-même ou toute tierce personne. Si
 vous avez reçu ce courrier électronique par erreur, vous êtes prié d'en
 avertir immédiatement l'expéditeur et d'effacer le message e-mail de votre
 ordinateur.

 De informatie in deze e-mail, bijlagen inbegrepen, is vertrouwelijk en is
 als dus danig voorbehouden voor exclusief gebruik door de hierboven
 vermelde bestemmeling(en). Indien u niet de bestemmeling bent, willen wij u
 erop wijzen dat u deze informatie niet mag aanwenden voor eigen gebruik
 noch verspreiden aan derden. Indien u deze e-mail per ongeluk hebt
 ontvangen, gelieve de afzender onmiddellijk te verwittigen en deze e-mail
 van uw computer te verwijderen.

 The information contained in this e-mail and the annexed documents is
 confidential and exclusively available to the here above mentioned
 addressee(s).Should you not be the addressee, please be informed that you
 may neither disclose nor reproduce this e-mail, nor may the information
 contained in this e-mail and its eventually annexed documents be used by
 yourself or by a third party. If you erroneously received this e-mail,
 could you kindly and immediately inform the addresser and delete the
 message on your computer.

 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
 (Related lists -
  https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


images1___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-09-10 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:31 AM, yuppie y.2...@wcm-solutions.de 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 declare the ZTUtils it uses as public. But that would require new
 CMF releases for the new maintenance releases of Zope. And other packages
 might have the same problem.

ZTUtils is part of Zope2 and clearly intended for use inside templates
/ restricted code. So it should be fixed there.

 Were the restrictions tightened too much in Zope?

I'm not sure. There isn't really any clear documentation on what APIs
you are supposed to use. It seems ZTUtils.__init__ sets
__allow_access_to_unprotected_subobjects__ = 1 on the module scope
level. But it doesn't use the allow_module or ModuleSecurityInfo APIs.
I'm guessing this is all historical baggage and the proper APIs were
only created much later.

Maybe some other long term developers can chime in with their perspective?

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-08-29 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com 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 updated the ZTK trunk to some new versions recently. Zope2 trunk
likely tracks ZTK trunk and thus broke.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] AccessControl bug fixed

2012-08-23 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:23 PM,  li...@nidelven-it.no 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 intended or at
least it would have already been broken in Zope 2.12.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] AccessControl bug fixed

2012-08-22 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Yusei TAHARA yu...@domen.cx wrote:
 I found a bug in ZopeSecurityPolicy and fixed it.

 http://svn.zope.org/AccessControl/trunk/src/AccessControl/ZopeSecurityPolicy.py?rev=127548r1=113657r2=127548

 Is it possible to release new version?

I can do that. But is there any chance you could write a test for
this. Or at least tell us how you found this bug?

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-08-19 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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. 
Patches can be sent we private email, posted to bug trackers, on paste.org like 
services or sent via pull requests. All of those are legally the same and it's 
the responsibility of the person doing the checkin to validate the copyright 
situation. That said a lot of patches don't actually contain any creative work 
that falls under the copyright rules. This last point is the reason most 
projects aren't very strict about this issue.

Hanno

On 19.08.2012, at 13:01, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Jens Vagelpohl j...@dataflake.org wrote:
 
 On Aug 19, 2012, at 10:17 , Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 And since it becomes ever easier to accept code from unknown sources (e.g. 
 pull requests) legal code ownership becomes an issue again.
 
 And that returns me to my first question: Is it really legally
 different for a contributor to accept a pull request from a
 non-contributor compared with a contributor merging a patch from a
 non-contributor?
 
 Legally, both are disallowed unless there's some proof (written statement 
 etc) from the code author that he assigns ownership of the patch or the 
 contents of that pull request to the contributor who is doing the checkin.
 
 In the past we haven't done a good job of enforcing this clear ownership 
 assignment chain. There are always code patches from non-contributors in the 
 bug tracker that may make it into the code base with the help of a 
 contributor. There's a grey area: Is the act of submitting a patch into the 
 Zope bug tracker enough to signal I am giving you ownership of this code? 
 I am not sure.
 
 GitHub makes this pulling in of outside code even easier. I'm afraid it 
 will become even harder to really maintain this chain of custody.
 
 This is then, IMO a problem that we should fix. What you are in fact
 saying is that the current system are violating people's copyright
 everytime we merge a non-contributors patch. It is unfeasible to not
 merge peoples patches, and I think it is also a big problem that the
 way the ownership of the code works now inhibits the increased
 simplicity of making and merging fixes for non-core contributors.
 
 In other words, we have had an ownership situation which is terrible,
 and nobody seems to have realized this until now. Well, now we know.
 
 As such, the discussion must now shift from don't do this to how do
 we do this. Poeple want to contribute and we should not say don't do
 that, we have to figure out *how* to make it possible to do that, and
 pretty pronto as well.
 
 //Lennart
 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
 (Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-08-18 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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 development of the 
stable branch into the same place.

Hanno

On 18.08.2012, at 09:49, Jens Vagelpohl j...@dataflake.org wrote:

 Hi Alex,
 
 Please revert this checkin. You can't just take core software pieces from 
 Zope Foundation-hosted repositories and move them somewhere else.
 
 Thanks!
 
 jens
 
 
 
 On Aug 18, 2012, at 3:09 , J. Alexander Clark cvs-ad...@zope.org wrote:
 
 Log message for revision 127519:
 Moved to github
 
 
 Changed:
 A   zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt
 D   zc.buildout/trunk/
 
 -=-
 Added: zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt
 ===
 --- zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt(rev 0)
 +++ zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt2012-08-18 01:09:06 UTC (rev 
 127519)
 @@ -0,0 +1 @@
 +https://github.com/buildout/buildout/tree/1.6.x
 
 ___
 checkins mailing list
 check...@zope.org
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/checkins
 
 ___
 Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
 (Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-07-10 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 7:29 AM, yuppie y.2...@wcm-solutions.de 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 version of BrowserView from the base classes.

 Please let me know if you have any questions or if I did break something.

Did you add a changelog entry? Maybe that could mention that the aq_*
attributes are no longer available on those views/pages (Five's
BrowserView's only purpose is to provide those for backwards
compatibility).

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-07-03 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman
janwijbr...@gmail.com 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 base
version the fork was started from. Or otherwise update the fork with
the changes done in the meantime.

I see a bunch of unrelated changes in there, like the
implements/implementer changes. I'm not sure what else is unrelated to
the proposed change.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] using WSGIPublisher

2012-06-06 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Paul J Stevens p...@nfg.nl 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://github.com/hannosch/zope2-wsgi/blob/master/templates/zope.ini

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 some features like publisher events and
exception views, which in practice are used by Plone. There's a reason
why Pyramid came up with the tweens concept and I think there's little
benefit for existing Zope2 applications to be split up into
middleware. Since the repoze project itself isn't moving forward any
longer, there's little benefit in code re-use with it either.

So I'd probably just merge back the exception and transaction handling
into the Zope2 WSGI publisher (keeping some of the code cleanup).

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] using WSGIPublisher

2012-06-06 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com 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 some features like publisher events and
 exception views, which in practice are used by Plone.

[snip my subjective view on repoze project]

 So I'd probably just merge back the exception and transaction
 handling into the Zope2 WSGI publisher (keeping some of the code
 cleanup).

 That could still be a reasonable choice.  Another choice would be to just
 add an integration point into the publisher which wrapped the middleware
 in at startup time, without requiring explicit configuration.

As I said above, my main concern is keeping publisher events and
exception views intact. Some of these events need to happen in code
that's currently inside repoze.* middleware. Like before transaction
commit, publication failure or publication success. For exception
handling Plone wants to load some settings from inside the database.
Mangling those into a WSGI environment is a bit tedious - having a
real Zope request/response object makes that a bit easier.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-05-30 Thread Hanno Schlichting
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-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.7/zopeapp-versions.cfg

Updated versions:
[name = old - new]

zope.event = 3.5.1 - 3.5.2
zope.exceptions = 3.6.1 - 3.6.2
zope.index = 3.6.3 - 3.6.4
zope.sendmail = 3.7.4 - 3.7.5
zope.tales = 3.5.1 - 3.5.2
distribute = 0.6.24 - 0.6.27
pytz = 2011n - 2012c

New tool chain versions:

coverage = 3.5.2
nose = 1.1.2

or:

[buildout]
extends =
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.5/ztk-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.5/zopeapp-versions.cfg

Updated versions:
[name = old - new]

zope.event = 3.5.1 - 3.5.2
zope.exceptions = 3.6.1 - 3.6.2
zope.index = 3.6.3 - 3.6.4
zope.sendmail = 3.7.4 - 3.7.5
zope.tales = 3.5.1 - 3.5.2
distribute = 0.6.24 - 0.6.27
py = 1.4.7 - 1.4.8
pytz = 2011n - 2012c

New tool chain versions:

coverage = 3.5.2
nose = 1.1.2

Kind regards,
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-05-28 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com 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 Wednesday.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] ZTK 1.0 lifetime

2012-05-22 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:32 AM, Patrick Gerken do3cc...@googlemail.com 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 potential Zope 4 is aiming at a future ZTK 1.2
(currently ZTK master).

So from Zope 2's and Plone's perspective the ZTK 1.0 tests are vital
and should be supported for the next couple of years. The only
difference is that Zope 2 requires at least Python 2.6, so testing
Python 2.5 + ZTK 1.0 isn't required.

And this shouldn't be all too hard, as there's no major differences
between ZTK 1.0 and 1.1.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-05-10 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com 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 hour I gave up.

I've now disabled the dev builders using checkouts of all
ZTK/ZopeApp packages and restarted the server.

Let's see if the tests for released packages still work.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-05-02 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Adam GROSZER agroszer...@gmail.com 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 just drop it from the
stable 1.0 and 1.1 series.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-04-27 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Adam GROSZER agroszer...@gmail.com 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 four times now, always hanging on the zc.sourcefactory
tests. So I think it's safe to assume there's an actual problem with
those tests and not the buildbot.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-04-20 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com 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 were some hanging processes. I killed them all, cleaned the
build folder and am restarting the box now.

Should be better tomorrow,
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-04-11 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Jeff Rush jr...@taupro.com 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.

Sounds likely. I haven't heard of anyone trying to use zope.session in
Zope 2. Does zope.session do something very different from the Zope 2
session manager?

You might also want to look at
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/collective.beaker for seamlessly
integrating Beaker into Zope 2 - with all the advantages of Beaker and
different backends.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


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

2012-04-09 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com 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 which depends on
 zope.interface, zope.component, and the ZODB, and invert the dependency
 by having the new code install something into the base code which
 provides the desired support:  the only change to zope.interface should
 be documenting the insertion point, and testing that it does the right
 thing when a dummy is plugged into it.

I looked at the possible contenders for that dependency description.
The ZODB depends on zope.interface itself, though not on
zope.component.

zope.container is the one that has the most minimal dependencies,
while still relying on zope.component and the ZODB.

zope.site depends on zope.container, but given its scope sounds like
the better place to me. I vaguely remember us discussing to move
persistent registries into zope.site at some point. Since we moved
zope.site.hooks into zope.component, zope.site doesn't have much else
to do anymore.

Apart from those two, there's a whole lot more that have far more
dependencies or are unrelated in scope, like zope.annotation or
zope.catalog.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Bugtracker for z3c.relationfield and reasons for objects loosing their parent pointers

2012-03-27 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Patrick Gerken do3cc...@googlemail.com wrote:
 I found out, somewhat surprised, that __parent__ pointers are just
 disguised aq_parent pointers.

Are you maybe trying to use or set __parent__ on Acquisition wrappers
instead of unwrapped objects?

AQ wrappers have various attributes, among those aq_parent and
__parent__ being the same thing. If you store an actual __parent__
attribute on a real object, you should make sure to not wrap it in
an Acquisition context or explicitly unwrap it before we
Acquisition.aq_base(obj). You might need some compatibility code for
Zope 3 libraries, to introduce aq_base calls in the right places.

On any one object, you use either parent pointers to real persistent
objects, or you use Acquisition. Zope 2.12 has not introduced anything
to actually store pointers to real objects. It just provides forward
compatibility, so objects that do have those pointers, can avoid using
Acquisition. And all of that while keeping the Acquisition API's like
from Acquisition import aq_parent, aq_get) intact and working for
both types of approaches. Or well, this is a bit of a lie, Zope 2.12
actually did change things for browser views, so those don't inherit
from Acquisition anymore, but with those view.__parent__ is just the
same as view.context - so it's easier.

We worked on actually storing parent pointers on objects during last
years Zope 4 sprint at Plone Conf. But today I doubt using parent
pointers actually works. Or at least you have to be really careful
with Acquisition wrappers and cannot use API's like OFS.CopySupport or
ZEXP export.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Bugtracker for z3c.relationfield and reasons for objects loosing their parent pointers

2012-03-27 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Patrick Gerken do3cc...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Hmm, since I didn't understand what magic happens with __parent__ pointers,
 I tried the following in pdb:
 unwrapped = aq_base(a)
 unwrapped.__parent__ = aq_base(a.__parent__)

 So I stored a not acquisition wrapped object onto the __parent__ attr
 of another unwrapped object.
 But then the result, unwrapped.__parent__ was acquisition wrapped again!

Yep. That's one thing we changed in Acquisition and ExtensionClass
4.0a1: Prevent wrappers to be created while accessing __parent__ on
types derived from Explicit or Implicit base classes.

Usually accessing any attribute on a type derived from
Acquisition.Explicit or Implicit will force wrapping to take place,
unless there's already a wrapper present. Maybe you remember the whole
weird story with browser views in Zope 2 and the need for using
context = aq_inner(self.context). That was the same problem.
Accessing the context attribute of the view (self), created a wrapper
equivalent to: context = context.__of__(self), as the view itself
wasn't wrapped in anything. For views we got rid of the problem by
removing the Acquisition.Implicit base class.

For normal content classes in Zope 2, removing the Implicit base class
is much harder, as there's more stuff depending on it, and you'd need
to ensure to switch every type derived from this, to manually store
parent pointers. But the 4.0a1 releases of AQ/EC at least treat
__parent__ differently, as it doesn't make much sense to force
wrapping for that particular attribute.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] New release for zope.schema

2012-03-21 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:
    For packages that have C extension modules there are probably extra
    steps needed to produce Windows binary eggs.  I don't know those
    steps (winbot is involved somehow), so I avoid making releases of
    packages that have C extension modules.  How do I check if a package
    has C extension modules?  I go to PyPI and look if there are Windows
    binary eggs available for download for the current version.
    zope.schema doesn't, so I'm just including this for general
    reference purposes.

The point of winbot is to take away all the pain and it does so.

There's no extra steps at all for packages containing C extensions.
Just make sure you create a release with a proper tag - winbot does
the rest.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 4, OK: 35

2012-03-15 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 On 03/14/2012 09:00 PM, Zope tests summarizer wrote:
 [1]    FAILED  winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win32
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-March/059300.html

 [2]    FAILED  winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-March/059301.html

 [3]    FAILED  winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win32
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-March/059302.html

 [4]    FAILED  winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win64
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2012-March/059303.html

 All fail with::

  While:
   Installing test-zopeapp.
   Getting distribution for 'ZODB3=3.10'.
  Error: Picked: zodb3 = 3.10.5

 Ideas?

I think I fixed that in zope.app.publication now. Note that these are
dev builds, so they use all packages from SVN.

z.a.publication added a new requirement for ZODB3=3.10. But ZODB on
its 3.10 branch notes its version as 3.10dev. As 3.10dev  3.10 the
check failed.

Relaxing the check to ZODB3=3.10dev should fix this. Alternatively
ZODB33.10.999 would have worked as well.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 4, OK: 35

2012-03-15 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:
 On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 03:40:25PM +0100, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
 z.a.publication added a new requirement for ZODB3=3.10. But ZODB on
 its 3.10 branch notes its version as 3.10dev.

 Eh?  That implies that 3.10 will be the next released version from that
 branch, which makes no sense, given that the last release was 3.10.5.
 The branch should identify itself as 3.10.6dev.

I think Jim always used a slightly different approach, preferring to
keep any version numbers out of SVN, so we are lucky it states 3.10
at all. As the ZODB isn't part of the ZTK, the ZTK guidelines on
version numbers don't apply. I don't see any real issues here.

 As 3.10dev  3.10 the
 check failed.

 Relaxing the check to ZODB3=3.10dev should fix this. Alternatively
 ZODB33.10.999 would have worked as well.

 Perhaps you meant ZODB3  3.9.999?

yes, sure.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Bad ZODB 3.10.5 egg on PyPI, cleanup needed

2012-03-12 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Marius Gedminas mar...@gedmin.as wrote:
 http://pypi.python.org/pypi/ZODB3/3.10.5 contains various proper win32
 eggs in addition to that .win32.zip.  The PyPI page for 3.10.4 did not
 have any weird .win32.zip files.

 Can someone please remove that dumb binary file which is built for
 Windows XP (and doesn't even mention for which Python version)?

J1m apparently took care of that:

add 2.7 file ZODB3-3.10.5.win32.zip 2012-03-12 20:22J1m 12.x.x.x
remove file ZODB3-3.10.5.win32.zip  2012-03-12 22:06J1m 12.x.x.x

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zc.async versus Zope 2 SIGTERM

2012-03-01 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Vincent Fretin vincent.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
 Did you look how http://pypi.python.org/pypi/plone.app.async have done the
 integration with Zope2?

IIRC we (Jarn) ran into the same problem when running p.a.async. Our
solution was to switch to using SIGINT for process shutdown. We used
supervisor, so for each Zope process section we added stopsignal=INT

But on unexpected process or server restarts, we still had stuck
workers once in a while. We never had the time to investigate, so just
handled those manually.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 1.0.6 and 1.1.4 released

2012-02-14 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Sebastien Douche sdou...@gmail.com wrote:
 Cool! Any news for for the trunk? Any chance to see a ZTK 2.0?

I'm not involved in ZTK discussions beyond 1.1 or Zope 2 discussions
beyond 2.13.

But even as a bystander I haven't seen anyone talk about such a
release or anyone requesting it.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 1.0.6 and 1.1.4 released

2012-02-13 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi.

On behalf of the Zope Toolkit release team and the Zope community, I'm
happy to announce the release of the Zope Toolkit 1.0.6 and 1.1.4.

Both releases are minor bugfix releases.

To use the new releases, you can use:

[buildout]
extends =
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.6/ztk-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.6/zopeapp-versions.cfg

or:

[buildout]
extends =
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.4/ztk-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.4/zopeapp-versions.cfg

Kind regards,
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 1.0.6 and 1.1.4 released

2012-02-13 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Joshua Immanuel j...@hipro.co.in wrote:
 Wonderful!!. It would be very helpful if there is a changelog associated
 with it. So, that we can know the important changes that have taken
 place in associated packages.

Sure, that would be helpful. Unfortunately nobody has volunteered to
write a script to produce such a changelog. You can download and diff
the files at http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/ yourself.

But in general there's no important changes in the ZTK maintenance
releases, unless you've been tracking a specific issue relevant to one
of your applications.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 26, OK: 39, UNKNOWN: 2

2012-02-08 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Gediminas Paulauskas mene...@pov.lt wrote:
 The majority of failures are in zope.testrunner, due to recent update
 of versions. The offending one is testtools 0.9.13. With testtools
 0.9.12 the tests pass.

Thanks for looking at those.

I hopefully fixed the Zope 4 failures - related to not being allowed
to download elementtree from effbot.org.

I also likely fixed the winbot problems, which were due to missing
binary eggs. Specifically zope.index 3.6.3 had no tag in Subversion,
so the wineggbuilder couldn't create binary eggs for this release.

I'm installing security updates on the winbot and will restart it in a
few moments.

Let's see what this night results will bring us.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 4 release management

2012-02-06 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:
 I would actually argue that Zope4 have no real release cycle at all:
 instead, the individual pieces which make up Zope should have their own
 cycles, with perhaps a ZTK-like tracking set that Plone and others use as
 platform targets.

not sure whom I'm quoting here, but: Zope 2 is special in that it
still has one big library named Zope2 at its center. It's not just a
collection of libraries. And a lot of the bigger changes being
proposed need coordinated changes to multiple libraries. Like the
__parent__ work or likely any non-trivial change to publication. You
can likely evolve DateTime, Record, Missing or DocumentTermplate on
their own - but that's not terribly exciting.

 I agree; actually ZTK-like tracking set is really already talking about
 doing releases, just like the ZTK has releases. And just like ZTK releases
 do, this needs some release management effort.

 Now I would advocate that Zope 4 releases mimic the ZTK in the way things
 are managed.

Just to clarify: Do you mean in terms of its release team? So instead
of having one release manager constituting a team? A team representing
the different consumer groups of Zope? Something like Plone, pure-CMF,
non-CMF?

In terms of its scope Zope 4 is meant to be a feature release, which
needs coordination and decisions on what to include. That makes it a
bit different from the ZTK, where the release team explicitly stays
out of setting development direction and avoids influencing what
happens in each library.

So I'm not sure the ZTK release team model is directly applicable to
Zope 4. The ZTK works fairly well for a mostly stable set of
libraries, where not much happens and at most quarterly bug fix
releases are needed.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] ZTK maintenance releases coming up

2012-02-06 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi.

I just updated the ZTK 1.0 and 1.1 branches to all latest bugfix versions.

I'll give the buildbots until Wednesday to build and find any real
problems. If there's no problems, I'll cut new ZTK 1.0.x and 1.1.x
releases later this week.

If you have any other bugfixes you want to get into those, now's the time ;-)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] [zope2] 2.12.x formal end-of-life

2012-02-06 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi.

I just updated the 2.12.x branch with one last batch of bugfix
versions. I'll let the buildbots run and if there's no troubles
release one more version later this week.

I consider this to be the last maintenance release for the 2.12.x
series. From now on 2.12.x will only see security updates. I've also
put an end-date to the security support
(http://zope2.zope.org/releases), stating October 2013 as the end
date. This happens to be the end of security support for Python 2.6 -
the only Python version supported by the 2.12.x series.

This is rather long in the future, one and a half years from now. I
think that sets reasonable expectations and gives us a clear end date.
It's not meant to prohibit anyone from doing security releases after
this date - just set clear expectations to others, like Linux
distributors shipping Zope 2 and relieve me of my formal duty ;-)

The 2.13 series is going to be supported longer. How long depends on
Python 2.7's support and how Zope 4 is going to progress. At this
point there's no formal end-of-life date.

If you have concerns, please speak up.

Zope 2.x release managerly yours ;-)
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Undo product stops working with recent Zope (StorageTransactionError)

2012-01-24 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM,  li...@nidelven-it.no wrote:
 It used to work, but with the most recent versions of
 Zope this error appears if the Undo by date is used
 more than once:

The undo API has changed with ZODB 3.10. As noted in the changelog:

The API for undoing multiple transactions has changed. To undo
multiple transactions in a single transaction, pass a list of
transaction identifiers to a database's undoMultiple method. Calling a
database's undo method multiple times in the same transaction now
raises an exception.

Your code calls undo multiple times, and needs to be changed accordingly.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 3, OK: 60

2011-12-08 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Michael Howitz m...@gocept.com wrote:
 [3]    FAILED  winbot / ZODB_dev py_254_win32
       https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-December/053803.html

 Same errors like yesterday due to incompatibles with Python 2.4 reps. 2.5.

I think I managed to remove that combination from the winbot. It's
restarting now after getting some security updates.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 1.0.5 and 1.1.3 released

2011-11-20 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi.

On behalf of the Zope Toolkit release team and the Zope community, I'm
happy to announce the release of the Zope Toolkit 1.0.5 and 1.1.3.

Both releases are minor bugfix releases. A schedule for a ZTK 1.2
release is unknown at this point.

To use the new release, you can use:

[buildout]
extends =
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.5/ztk-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.5/zopeapp-versions.cfg

or:

[buildout]
extends =
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.3/ztk-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.3/zopeapp-versions.cfg

Kind regards,
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] New ZTK-Release?

2011-11-07 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Michael Howitz m...@gocept.com wrote:
 after having the buildbots green again, I think it would be a good point in 
 time for a series new ZTK releases:

 * 1.0.5 (yes, there are even on the 1.0 branch version updates),
 * 1.1.3,
 * 1.2c1 (a new release branch from the trunk)

 Who is in charge for the ZTK releases?
 Is there still the ZTK team?

The ZTK release team is still officially in place.

I can take care of the ZTK 1.0 and 1.1 bugfix releases.

I won't be involved in ZTK 1.2 decisions myself, the same way I won't
take care of Zope2 4.0.

So I'm not sure what the process for that will be.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Zope 4 - San Francisco sprint and beyond

2011-11-06 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi.

A couple of us came together before the Plone conference to work on
various Zope related topics. We worked on the following areas:

- storing parent pointers (elro, davisagli): we have a branch of Zope
that changes OFS to store parent pointers and fixed the issues that
arose in copy/cut/paste and zexp export code. There's an issue
remaining with Acquisition, where we lost some protection against
cycle protection - I continue working on this.

- catalog using intids (rossp): we have branches of Zope, ZCatalog and
CMF which change the catalog to use intids as their internal uid and
rid. This needs more testing, but looks very promising. Currently it
uses plone.app.intid / five.intid to maintain an intid to physical
path mapping. Once the parent pointer work is stable, we can stop
doing this and load objects directly from the database connection

- Chameleon (chaoflow): Florian worked on making Zope use Chameleon by
default. This works for the most parts, but there's some problems left
in tests, as Chameleon wants an utility to be registered but a lot of
tests in Zope and CMF don't use ZCML test layers.

- Traversal simplification: Mikko worked on researching traversal and
options to simplify it. The first idea was to unify some of the code
used for URL, path and path expression traversal to bring those more
in line. Not sure how far he got ;)

- WebOb (garbas): Rok worked on bringing in WebOb as an underpinning
for the request/response objects and making both API's available at
the same time. I think the request is done and a good deal of the
response works. Doing this means we can deprecate parts of the old
request API and encourage the use of the more standard WebOb API.

- WSGI (matthewwilkes, hannosch): We fixed the bugs that had been
reported about using the current WSGI support (mod_wsgi problems,
forced dependency on repoze.who) on trunk and the 2.13 branch.
Afterwards Matthew continued on a branch to remove the ZServer/medusa
from Zope and leave only the WSGI publisher in place.

We had a bunch of other ideas on what to do, like allowing Unicode ids
in OFS, working on security and similar large topics.

I hope I haven't forgotten anyone. Most of the code currently lives in
branches or forks on https://github.com/zopefoundation. We haven't
figured out yet how to proceed with that. In terms of copyright all
committers to the GitHub repository have signed Zope contributor
agreements already, so there's no imminent legal problem.

Which of these branches should make it into Zope and for which release
is completely open and is going to be up for discussion.

On a personal note, I won't be available as the release manager for
the next Zope 4 release - as originally outlined in my mail from 2010
(https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2010-March/039880.html).
I'll continue to take care of the maintenance releases for the 2.12
and 2.13 series. At least unless someone else shows an interest in
picking up this work. Should there be anyone interested in this
position, speak up on this mailing list. Once someone has been found,
I'll make sure the person gets documentation and access to all
relevant resources.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 4?

2011-10-27 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:26 PM, David Glick davidgl...@groundwire.org wrote:
 On 10/27/11 9:05 AM, Jim Fulton wrote:
 Is there a more formal announcement anywhere?  Is there a description
 of what it is envisioned to be?

 That came out of this thread on zope-dev back in July:
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2011-July/043158.html

There's no more public announcement, as it's all just work in progress.

I made up a bad list of bullet points at:
http://docs.zope.org/zope2/releases/4.0/WHATSNEW.html

But the gist is: There's no point in doing a Zope 2.14 release with
incremental improvements, as there's nothing such a release could
contain. So it makes sense to do a less backwards compatible release
and bump the major version number. People rightfully complained that
doing a Zope2 3.0 release is a bit insane. So the next number up for
grasp is Zope2 4.0 - at which point it can be called Zope 4.0 again.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 12, OK: 39

2011-10-27 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 [12]   FAILED  winbot / z3c.form_py_265_32
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-October/051752.html

 Same failure as yesterday:  perhaps it ran before Hanno's pinning fix.

Yep. There's two green builds for this one now:

http://winbot.zope.org/builders/z3c.form_py_265_32

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 7, OK: 41

2011-10-26 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 [6]    FAILED  winbot / z3c.form_py_265_32
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-October/051704.html

 I'm ignoring this one, except to note that it is *not* lxml related.

This was a version conflict for some Chameleon libraries, as a result
of half-pinning.

I pinned all Chameleon versions and the build worked locally for me.
Maybe it'll work soon on the winbot.

 [7]    FAILED  winbot / ztk_dev py_254_win32
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-October/051719.html

 This build should be disabled:  the ZTK trunk is no longer compatible
 with Python 2.5.

I removed it.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 21, OK: 31

2011-10-24 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 I also prefer that we drop 2.5 compatibility on the ZTK trunk.  The
 2.5.6 release page says[1]:

  This release is most likely the final release of Python 2.5; under
  the current release policy, no security issues in Python 2.5 will be
  fixed after October, 2011.

 [1] http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.5.6/

Fine by me. We have ZTK 1.1 which can keep Python 2.5 support.

For Zope 2, we have dropped Python 2.5 long ago and only do Python 2.6
and 2.7 these days.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 21, OK: 37

2011-10-23 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 #10 - 20 omitted:  perma-failing z3c.* tests esse delendam!

I disabled the z3c.* tests on the winbot now. If someone has time to
reconfigure it, so those are only run but don't sent out mail
notifications - please go ahead.

I did leave the actually used z3c.form enabled, but pinned the lxml
dependency to version 2.3 - instead of taking latest. 2.3 has binary
eggs for most platforms including Windows, so the build has a chance
to succeed.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] [collective.recipe.solrinstance] Example not working

2011-10-18 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
 Should we migrate the recipe to github and get a free issue tracker?

Ok. I've started the SVN to Git migration. Repo will be at
https://github.com/hannosch/collective.recipe.solrinstance and anyone
who has recently committed should have contributor rights to the new
repo.

Andreas: Please add an issue at
https://github.com/hannosch/collective.recipe.solrinstance/issues ;)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] [collective.recipe.solrinstance] Example not working

2011-10-17 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Andreas Jung li...@zopyx.com wrote:
 I used the single-core example for the solrinstance recipe:

I think someone reported the Solr core examples to be broken in the
latest releases. I don't use the core-variants myself, though.

Without an issue tracker, it's hard to keep track of those reports.

Should we migrate the recipe to github and get a free issue tracker?

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Question about RestrictedPython installation with python2.6

2011-10-10 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov cvs-...@yandex.ru wrote:
 And this is breaks packaging on FreeBSD, since there will be no
 before_and_after27.py[c,o] and security_in_syntax27.py[c,o] that we
 expecting.
 I know that this files included conditionally, but easy_install still
 tries to compile them all independent of python version. As result - we
 see this ugly errors. Is there anything i can do with this? (some
 easy_install option to not compile this files) or can i anyhow to not
 build and install tests? Thanks in advance for answer.

There's no options for easy_install that prevent these. You'll have to
either use the underlying setuptools API's or write some post-cleanup
script that does what you need here.

Those error messages are annoying, but we'll likely won't get rid of
them before we switch to the new packaging / distutils libraries
some time in the future.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Security vulnerabiity CVE 2011-3587: Arbitrary Code Execution

2011-10-04 Thread Hanno Schlichting
The Zope security response team is announcing a fix for a
vulnerability in Zope 2.12.x and Zope 2.13.x that allows execution of
arbitrary code by anonymous users. The hotfix for this vulnerability
was pre-announced last week.

This is a severe vulnerability that allows an unauthenticated attacker
to employ a carefully crafted web request to execute arbitrary
commands with the privileges of the Zope service.

Versions Affected:  Zope 2.12.x and Zope 2.13.x.

Versions Not Affected: Zope 2.11.x, Zope 2.10.x or prior

You can either install the Hotfix as an egg release from
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Products.Zope_Hotfix_CVE_2011_3587 or as
an old-style product release available from
http://download.zope.org/Zope2/hotfixes/Zope_Hotfix_CVE_2011_3587-v10.tar.gz.

Alternatively you can upgrade to the latest bugfix release of Zope.
Versions 2.12.20 and 2.13.10 will be released today and include the
fix for this vulnerability.

Please refer to
http://zope2.zope.org/news/security-vulnerability-announcement-cve-2011-3587
for more details.

The Plone community has also released a security hotfix today covering
an additional security issue. If you are using Plone, please refer to
http://plone.org/products/plone/security/advisories/20110928.

On behalf of the Zope security response team,
Hanno Schlichting
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Who has access to wineggbuilder was Re: zope.interface 3.8 win eggs

2011-09-24 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Adam Groszer agros...@gmail.com wrote:
 Something is totally borked there.
 http://winbot.zope.org/builders/wineggbuilder/builds/13939/steps/release%20eggs/logs/stdio

I took a look and fixed the problem. It came down to a missing version
pin for BeautifulSoup and a new backwards incompatible 4.0b version of
it.

The missing binary eggs are build and uploaded as we speak.

Adam: I also installed all the latest Windows security updates and
restarted the server once for that.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] access to create z.i and z.c releases

2011-09-22 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
 I've made tags for zope.interface 3.8.0 and zope.component 3.11.0, as
 described in a recent thread to this list, but I don't have PyPI owner
 rights to publish them.  Can someone add me to the owners list for those
 packages (my pypi user name is chrism)?

Added, release away!

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] cache_detail crash

2011-09-22 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov cvs-...@yandex.ru wrote:
 Can anybody reproduce this?

Yes, it's a known bug reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope2/+bug/838978

Patches are very welcome for this.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Passing variable across pages

2011-09-21 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Babylakshmi Muthusamy
babylakshmim...@gmail.com wrote:
 Please suggest me a solution for this.

Please post your question to the users mailing list at
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope

This mailing list is for the development of Zope, not development with Zope.

Thanks,
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] ohloh listings

2011-09-12 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi.

On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
 Could you delete and readd the failed repository enlistments at
 https://www.ohloh.net/p/zope/enlistments?page=13

Tried that - had no effect as it indeed recognized the old urls. So I
removed them and added them instead via the http:// protocol. They are
now on the first page at https://www.ohloh.net/p/zope/enlistments and
currently not scheduled yet.

Chris, if you want I can add you as a manager, I think you need to
request that at https://www.ohloh.net/p/zope/manages/new

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope.deprecation

2011-09-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
 I've given Python 3 support to zope.deprecation at
 http://svn.zope.org/zope.deprecation/branches/chrism-unittesting/

 - Which Python versions is this thing meant to support?  I have it
  functioning under 2.5, 2.6, 2.7 (and 3.2).  Do we need it
  to support 2.4?

We no longer need Python 2.4 compatibility for new stuff (only for
bugfixes to ZTK 1.0).

 - I presume the version number after merge should be bumped to
  3.5 (it was branched from 3.42dev)?

Yes, we treat Python 3 compatibility as a new feature. So this will
only go into ZTK trunk.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] RFC: proposal to split zope.configuration into ZCML and non-ZCML related packages

2011-08-31 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Wolfgang Schnerring w...@gocept.com wrote:
 Splitting zope.configuration into core mechanics and ZCML support
 makes a lot of sense to me.

 So, +1 from me.

+1 here too

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 10, OK: 28, UNKNOWN: 3

2011-08-20 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 [1]    UNKNOWN FAILED (errors=1) : Zope-2.13-alltests Python-2.6.6 :
 Linux
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-August/048315.html

 I think this failure is due to recent acquisition grubbing::

 Error in test test_getObject_found
 (Products.ZCatalog.tests.test_zcatalog.TestZCatalogGetObject)

This was caused by changes to OFS.Traversable - I reverted those and
the tests pass again.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] RFC: Proposal for merging jbohman-zope.registry branch of zope.component

2011-08-17 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Adam GROSZER agros...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 22:50:42 -0400 you wrote:

 - - Merge the 'jbohman-zope.registry' branch of zope.component to the
    trunk, and bump its minor version accordingly.

Great work, +1 on merging (I trust the GSoC mentor did a good code review... ;)

 That sounds to me to rather have a *major* version number bump.

If backwards compatible imports are left in place, I don't mind it
being a 3.11.0 - but it might just as well be time to call it 4.0 :)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Segfault in Acquisition in Zope 2

2011-08-15 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Sylvain Viollon sylv...@infrae.com wrote:
   I have this problem with:

   - Python 2.6 and Zope 2.12

   - Python 2.7 and Zope 2.13

   (All the latest ones).

   This have been observed on 64 bits computers (Mac OS X, FreeBSD and Linux). 
 I don't know about 32 bits
   installations.

   Do you have any clues for me ?

Just to make sure, you used Acquisition 2.13.8 ?

That one solves one particular segfault on 64bit systems.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope.interface versions, ZTK 1.0 and later

2011-08-13 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 3:55 AM, Stephan Richter
srich...@cipherhealth.com wrote:
 On Friday, August 12, 2011, Tres Seaver wrote:
 Thoughts?

 +1. Sounds like a good plan.

+2 :)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Pluggable template engine

2011-08-13 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Malthe Borch mbo...@gmail.com wrote:
 I will merge this branch if there are no objections.

No objections - only thanks and cheers :)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Pluggable template engine

2011-07-21 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Malthe Borch mbo...@gmail.com wrote:
 I'd like to propose merging this into trunk.

+1

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] wineggbuilder?

2011-07-20 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
 I'm pondering making a release of zope.i18nmessageid to PyPI.  It has C
 extensions.  If I upload the release, does the wineggbuilder still come
 along and push windows binary eggs up eventually?

Yes. Just do the release, everything else follows automatically. And
if it doesn't poke me or Adam.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] congrats on the new zope.org launch, but..

2011-07-15 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:
 I'd just call the category web framework; 2 out of 3 already say they
 are. Zope can then itself say in its description that it's an
 application server if that's an important term.

At least zope2.zope.org uses the web framework term to describe Zope
2 as well. application server doesn't describe todays Zope 2
codebase and aim anymore either.

So I'd rather place all of the big guys in the web framework box.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: Zope/trunk/ Optimized the `OFS.Traversable.getPhysicalPath` method to avoid excessive amounts of method calls. Thx to Nikolay Kim from Enfold

2011-07-14 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 A further micro-optimization is to pre-allocate a big list in a thread
 local.  Running the attached script produces::

  $ python perftest.py
  Via insert_0: 24.8401839733
  Via append: 15.6596238613
   speedup: 37.0%
  Via tuple_add: 21.9555268288
   speedup: 11.6%
  Via prealloc: 10.5278339386
   speedup: 57.6%

Thanks for that test!

I've run it with a much more reasonable test data set from one of our
live databases, for example:

letters = ['', 'nordic', 'en', 'nordic-council', 'organisation-and-structure',
'committees', 'welfare-committee', 'meetings-and-meeting-documents',
'meeting-of-the-welfare-committee-31-march-2011-stockholm']

which produces quite a different result:

Via insert_0: 4.35216093063
Via append: 4.80827713013
  speedup: -10.5%
Via tuple_add: 1.73557782173
  speedup: 60.1%
Via prealloc: 2.17882084846
  speedup: 49.9%

If I run it with a smaller segment, like:

letters = ['', 'nordic', 'en', 'nordic-council']

the effect is even clearer:

Via insert_0: 1.88715004921
Via append: 2.91810202599
  speedup: -54.6%
Via tuple_add: 0.809303998947
  speedup: 57.1%
Via prealloc: 1.56584882736
  speedup: 17.0%

Looks like the tuple add is faster until you hit very long sequences.
But even if you had such a nested ZODB structure, the majority of
lookups would still happen for the much shorter sequences.

So I think the tuple add is the winner for this case.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] z3c.form missing *.mo files?

2011-07-12 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Michael Howitz m...@gocept.com wrote:
 To get the .mo files compiled at runtime you need the following variables in 
 os.environ:

 os.environ['zope_i18n_compile_mo_files'] = 'True'
 os.environ['zope_i18n_allowed_languages'] = 'de,en'

 (You might replace 'de,en' with the languages you need :)

 Additionally you need to depend on the package 'python-gettext' which 
 contains the compiler.

 Sadly this is only documented in the source code of zope.i18n.compile and and 
 zope.i18n.config.

The above is one approach I ported to zope.i18n from Plone's
PlacelessTranslationService. I think it's only documented in
Plone-level documentation.

You can also integrate the compilation into your build process and use
the gettext tools to do this:

msgfmt --no-hash -o folder/locales/en/LC_MESSAGES/domain.mo
folder/locales/en/LC_MESSAGES/domain.po

The --no-hash isn't required, but makes the files a bit smaller by
removing some data structures not used by Python's gettext
implementation. It also makes sure the files are identical to those
compiled with python-gettext.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] www.zope.org relaunched

2011-07-07 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Sylvain Viollon sylv...@infrae.com wrote:
 On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 13:58:27 +0200
 Andreas Jung li...@zopyx.com wrote:
 on behalf of the Zope Foundation I please to announce
 the relaunch of the new www.zope.org web site.

 http://www.zope.org

  Great !

+10 :)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-06 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi.

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Leonardo Rochael Almeida
leoroch...@gmail.com wrote:
 I guess this is the biggest point of contention. Why does the ZMI have
 to go? Although both Plone and ERP5 strive to gradually replace ZMI
 based configuration with native interfaces (native to Plone/ERP5),
 isn't there value in having a minimal OFS browser with the ability to
 Add/Delete/Copy/Cut/Paste objects as a fallback? It doesn't seem to
 conflict with your stated goal:

I think having a minimal database browser is a good idea. I think
something like https://github.com/davisagli/eye is the right starting
point here. I don't want to have anything that lives in the same
process as the rest of the application code. The ZMI is currently like
running phpMyAdmin accessible to the world with the same credentials
and on the same domain as the rest of your application. It's a huge
security risk and pollutes model classes and views in the application
code.

 Or to put it differently, in which way does having a minimalistic OFS
 browser for a ZMI conflicts or hinders Plone's objectives for the
 Zope2 code base?

The ZMI is a highly insecure, completely outdated and user-unfriendly interface.

On the security level, there's no validation of user-input, there's no
XSS and CSRF protection. Anyone being logged into your application who
has ZMI access is susceptible to a large number of attacks. There's
too much of stone-age code based on no-patterns to prevent these
attacks - we can currently only fix them in a tedious process of
finding one exploit after the other. We need a better strategy here -
and the only one I can see is removing the existing ZMI code and
moving any low-level interface to a completely separate codebase and
process.

On the other points, at least Plone tries to use modern web
technologies and for example we just switched to a HTML5 doctype -
having any end-user go to the ZMI and look at a frames-based interface
undermines any marketing message we try to put out about being modern.
And then the ZMI doesn't even do basic things like asking you for
confirmation before removing your entire site and being in almost all
regards a huge usability fail - again completely add odds with Plone's
good end-user usability story. On the code level the ZMI-support code
is mixed into all other model code and has often lead to arcane
developer API's. There's far too many places where a manage_* method
with a request argument is the only way to achieve anything. For
whatever code we'll end up with in two to three years, I want to see
good developer API's that actually make you productive.

I hope this clarifies a bit more, why I feel the ZMI is an arcane
beast that needs to be hunted down sooner than later.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Tobias Helfrich helfr...@know-it.net wrote:
 OK, so you do think that we might use Zope 2.12 for a quite long time
 without thinking about anymore updates? Will there be any security
 updates for Zope 2.12 in the future?

You want to use Zope 2.13. 2.12 is at the end of its active
maintenance cycle as is Python 2.6 (the only Python version it
supports).

Zope 2.13 brings support for Python 2.7, which is a long-term
maintenance release.

How long Zope 2.13 is going to be supported and sees security fixes
will depend on the community. The Plone community will use it for its
4.1 and 4.2 releases, as a result of our security policy that should
result in us supporting Zope 2.13 for the next two years. Beyond that
nobody knows what will happen.

 Now i am completely shocked. We are building web applications for
 the last 6 years in Zope 2.x. All those applications are using the
 following techniques:

[snip]

What you are describing is exactly what I meant by old legacy Zope2
applications.

You should be able to use this style of development with Zope 2.13.
But you won't be able to upgrade to newer versions of Zope 2 anymore
and expect your code to work unmodified. We discouraged this style of
development for the past six years. It should come as no surprise that
it will come to an end at some point.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Sylvain Viollon sylv...@infrae.com wrote:
  ... and I still do use the VirtualHostMonster
  (you can trash all the other things).

  I agree that its code might not been the best in the world, but it
  works for the moment and does what it says (I would love to see
  shiftNameToApplication implemented with more than one pass).

Ok. I didn't mean to remove the VHM at any point. I removed it from
the default content over the weekend but given its popularity, I think
I can safely put it back.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:19 PM, yuppie y.2...@wcm-solutions.de wrote:
 Long-term maintenance for Zope 2.13 would give these
 projects/deployments at least a few more years.

Yes. I'm willing to cut releases for it for quite a while. I just
expect to see active maintenance from the Plone community to stop in a
year or two. Judging from the ongoing maintenance we currently have
for Zope 2.10 or 2.11 I don't think it's very realistic to expect much
to happen once the Plone guys stop.

 What I'm outlining here has of course almost nothing to do with the
 original idea and scope of Zope 2. Maybe at some point this should get
 a different name ;-)

 I don't want to discuss names, but I think the next release from Zope
 trunk should be explicitly a new *major* release.

I think that's perfectly fine. Since I broke backwards compatibility
with a number of changes I did, a major version increase is warranted.

So we just got ourselves a Zope2 version 3.0. And no, naming it 4.0 or
5.0 or anything else doesn't make it any better at all. So 3.0 is the
most sensible one :)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Martin Aspeli optilude+li...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 5 July 2011 10:31, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote:
 So we just got ourselves a Zope2 version 3.0. And no, naming it 4.0 or
 5.0 or anything else doesn't make it any better at all. So 3.0 is the
 most sensible one :)

 Boy, that's going to be confusing. :)
 I'd actually favour calling it Zope2 4.0 just to avoid any mix-up with the
 defunct Zope 3, although I don't think there are any particularly good
 options here.

Zope2 4.0 would imply some sort of upgrade path from Zope 3 to this.
That's as confusing as anything else and would lead to the question
what happened to Zope2 3.0.

Since we don't market Zope2 anymore, I think there's actually much
less confusion from this than we'd fear. It's just an internal version
number used in some buildout files, not something that has any
particular meaning.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Jens Vagelpohl j...@dataflake.org wrote:
 On 7/5/11 11:56 , Martin Aspeli wrote:
 On 5 July 2011 10:31, Hanno Schlichtingha...@hannosch.eu  wrote:
 I'd actually favour calling it Zope2 4.0 just to avoid any mix-up with the
 defunct Zope 3, although I don't think there are any particularly good
 options here.

 I actually think it's a brilliant idea to skip 3.0 and call it 4.0.

Ok, seems 4.0 is the more popular choice.

We'll use that than and make Tres proud
(http://www.palladion.com/home/tseaver/obzervationz/2009/zope-4.0-project
- though zopefour.org has been taken over by a link farm).

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Jens Vagelpohl j...@dataflake.org wrote:
 zopefour as a domain isn't very helpful. It would add yet another
 top-level name to the existing list (Zope 2, Zope 3).

That was an April fools joke I was referring to. I didn't mean to
suggest to actually use that in any way ;-)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-03 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
 Zope still needs to the virtual host monster (or something like it) even
 with the WSGI publisher; there's nothing equivalent in the WSGI world
 (unless you could repoze.vhm, which is essentially just the virtual host
 monster, and probably doesn't need to live in middleware; no one uses it
 except people who use repoze.zope2).

I'm expecting us to use repoze.vhm. But I've left the VHM in the code,
so it's easy to install one if you still need it. For some time I
expect Plone to install a VHM as part of its installation process.

 I don't have any skin in this game, but FTR, Mike Bayer isn't feeling
 all that confident about Beaker's sessioning component (or so he has
 told me).  Beaker was originally made as a caching component, and had
 sessioning jammed into it quite late; nobody is really maintaining the
 sessioning component of it now.

Well, if I can choose between modern unmaintained code from Mike Bayer
and stone-age unmaintained code from Zope, it's still an easy choice
;-)

And looking at the basics of what Beaker does here, it's still much
more useful and of better quality than what we have in Zope 2.

If there's any other non-framework-specific session machinery out
there, we could use that as well. But I think most other stuff is tied
into Django.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] direction

2011-07-02 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Leonardo Rochael Almeida
leoroch...@gmail.com wrote:
 I noticed you've been very busy doing clean-up on the Zope2 code base
 in the last few hours. As someone who has recently spent a lot of time
 porting forward a large and mission-critical code base, ERP5, from
 Zope 2.8 to Zope 2.12, I'm a little confused about the direction that
 you're moving, and how much effort that could mean for future porting
 efforts for Nexedi.

I think moving to Zope 2.12 and 2.13 does have some value for Nexedi
or other large existing codebases, as you get support for current
versions of the ZODB, Zope Toolkit packages and support for Python 2.7
with Zope 2.13. Since Python 2.7 is a long-term maintenance release
for Python itself, this should provide a stable and good basis for the
next years - the statements from the Python community aren't
completely clear - but I'd expect to see ongoing maintenance until
2013 or maybe even 2015.

Going forward I can see two paths for Zope 2. Either we don't touch it
at all anymore and let it bitrot or we try to move it forward and
adept it to current best practices of development. Since complete
rewrites almost always fail, like we have seen with Zope 3 - I prefer
changing Zope 2.

If you are interested in stability I think sticking with an older
version of Zope 2 is a completely sane and good approach. What me and
others from the Plone community are trying to do with the Zope 2
codebase is to actually move it forward. We can either do that as part
of the official Zope 2 release series or fork the codebase. Since so
far there isn't really anyone else interested in working on the Zope 2
codebase, we keep changing Zope 2 without forking it.

 But can you explain to us a little of how you expect Zope2 to behave
 with the changes you're doing?

There's a number of things I want to do. Not sure when I'll or others
will have the time, but these are things I expect to happen in the
next months or releases:

- Continue to remove functionality tailored for TTW development, like
SiteRoot, AccessRules, HelpSys and step-by-step most of the ZMI
- Document and use the WSGI publisher and remove obsoleted
functionality like the virtual host monster, error_log,
ZServer/medusa, zopectl/zdaemon
- Make the browser id manager, session data manager, temporary storage
optional and remove it and request.SESSION from the core, instead we
can use something based on Products.BeakerSessionDataManager /
collective.beaker if someone has a need for sessions
- Start using and storing parent pointers and remove
Acquisition.Implicit from the most common base classes (a branch for
this already exists with almost all core tests passing)
- Merge five.pt (Chameleon) into the core and use it instead of the
zope.tal/zope.tales implementation (which means no more
RestrictedPython for templates)
- Once most of the ZMI is gone, it should be feasible to drop DTML or
rewrite what little is left as page templates

I think what's going to stay is AccessControl, OFS (a bit lighter),
ZPublisher (WSGI), the ZODB, ZCatalog and all the wiring for a set of
Zope Toolkit libraries like components, events, browser pages and so
on.

That's the kind of scope that should be possible to port to Python 3
and actually modernize enough to be understandable. At that point we
should even be able to catch up with years of missed security updates
- almost nothing in current Zope 2 protects against XSS, CSRF or any
of the other common security risks we have on the web today.

What I'm outlining here has of course almost nothing to do with the
original idea and scope of Zope 2. Maybe at some point this should get
a different name ;-)

I hope this makes the direction of where I am headed clearer or more
generally what Plone expects from its underlying framework.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] versions on zope.org and launchpad.net

2011-07-01 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Jens Vagelpohl j...@dataflake.org wrote:
 On 6/29/11 10:34 , Hanno Schlichting wrote:
 That's a bit confusing. Either we remove the downloads from launchpad
 or we make sure it has all of the old ones.

 +1 for removing.

I removed all of them from launchpad.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] versions on zope.org and launchpad.net

2011-06-29 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net wrote:
 My question would be: why launchpad? Is anyone expecting launchpad to be
 a canonical resource for Zope releases? As far as I know none of our
 documentation refers to launchpad for downloads and launchpad has never
 been used for anything other than it's bugtracker.

We did upload all non-egg Zope2 releases to
https://launchpad.net/zope2/+download but not the latest ones.

That's a bit confusing. Either we remove the downloads from launchpad
or we make sure it has all of the old ones.

I don't care either way for this historical stuff.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] zc.async.queue.DispatcherAgents last_ping

2011-06-29 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi Gary, or any other zc.async developer,

we use zc.async in one site and I noticed there's a hell of a lot of
write transactions caused by it.

Every 30 seconds there's a zope.minmax.Maximum() by the name of
last_ping stored. It looks like this is coming from
zc.async.queue.DispatcherAgents and the 30 seconds are a result of a
class variable stating: ping_interval =
datetime.timedelta(seconds=30)

I tried to understand what this last_ping is used for and it seems to
have to do with detection of dead workers.

Is that indeed the only thing it's used for? If so can we change it in
our setup to be 15 minutes instead without any big problems (other
than potentially not having any active worker for 15 minutes)?

Ideally I'd like to get avoid storing such information in the ZODB at
all and would much prefer a volatile attribute, a thread local or
something on the filesystem. But maybe I'm missing something here were
this information needs to be shared across workers running on
different machines.

While the size of the transaction is only 140 bytes each, the overhead
of new transactions is massive.

Any insights appreciated,
Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - OK: 64, UNKNOWN: 1

2011-06-21 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 Hmmm, many fewer reports than a normal weekday.  :(

I disabled the z3c and zc.buildout runs on the winbot, which had been
failing for months now.

Getting daily test failures hasn't convinced anyone to do anything
about them, so there's no motivational factor here. At this point they
only produced noise in the test summarizer and prevented us from
getting a meaningful green light.

That should account for some but not all of the fewer jobs.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Configurable Blob Permissions ZODB

2011-06-17 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Jim Fulton j...@zope.com wrote:
 On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Robert Niederreiter r...@squarewave.at 
 wrote:
 Any doubts, suggestions, other ideas?

 -1 for a new configuration option.

 I would rather just have write permission *only* removed
 from committed blob files.  Read permissions should be controlled
 by existing mechanisms such as umask.

+1 on Jim's suggestion - much simpler :)

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Sharing session between different zope servers

2011-06-15 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Subish K S kssubish...@yahoo.com wrote:
 We have 10+ Zope  (version 2.7) servers ( on different machines). Right now 
 each Zope server independently handles session management which means that if 
 a Zope server fails the users on that Zope server do not get redirected to a 
 functioning Zope server but get stuck on the failed Zope server.
 Is there any way to manage the session of all the zopes servers in a common 
 place.

If you have only a moderate number of sessions, you can store the
session storage on the ZEO server. If you use buildout you'd do
something like:

[zeo]
recipe = plone.recipe.zeoserver
...
zeo-conf-additional =
%import tempstorage
temporarystorage temp
name temp storage for sessioning
/temporarystorage


[instance1]
recipe = plone.recipe.zope2instance
...
zodb-temporary-storage =
zodb_db temporary
mount-point /temp_folder
zeoclient
server 10.0.0.1:8100
storage temp
name zeo-temp-storage
/zeoclient
/zodb_db

The config is the same if you just put these straight into zope.conf
and zeo.conf. Zope 2's built-in session machinery should handle a
couple dozen sessions at a time. Once you go beyond that look at
Beaker (via collective.beaker) and memcached as a backend.

This does apply to the currently supported Zope 2 versions (2.12 
2.13). I have no idea what of this works in the ancient 2.7.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Sharing session between different zope servers

2011-06-15 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Baiju M baiju.m.m...@gmail.com wrote:
 Is memcached a reliable storage for session data ?

 I would like to hear others experience with memcached
 as a reliable storage for session data.

It depends on what kind of reliability you need. Generally your
sessions should be short-lived and memcached is fine for that.

If you want to store really long-lasting session data, you can use any
SQL database backend for Beaker via SQLAlchemy.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 9, OK: 72

2011-06-11 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote:
 $ bin/alltests -s Acquisition -t test_mixed_explicit_and_explicit
 Running zope.testrunner.layer.UnitTests tests:
  Set up zope.testrunner.layer.UnitTests in 0.000 seconds.
 Segmentation fault

 I haven't yet tried to debug the problem itself.

I took the time to investigate this. It came down to the same issue
noted in https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/675064. Some code treated a C
int as a pointer. Apparently on most platforms sizeof(int) ==
sizeof(pointer), but there's some where that's not the case.

In this particular case it was a simple mistake of using the wrong variable:

PyObject *expl=0;
int explicit=1;

UNLESS (PyArg_ParseTupleAndKeywords(
 args, kw, O|i, acquire_args+1,
 name, filter, extra, explicit, defalt, containment
 ))
return NULL;

if (expl) explicit=PyObject_IsTrue(expl);

The fix was to pass expl instead of explicit into
PyArg_ParseTupleAndKeywords. Almost the same code existed in
Wrapper_acquire_method and module_aq_acquire and only
Wrapper_acquire_method got it wrong.

I released a new Acquisition version and put it into Zope 2.x.
Hopefully the buildbots will finally get green again.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 9, OK: 72

2011-06-11 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Jan-Wijbrand Kolman
janwijbr...@gmail.com wrote:
 It seems the python-2.7 from the deadsnakes PPA that is installed on
 this buildmachine behaves badly. I do not know why, and I do not really
 feel like investigating it. I'll remove the python-2.7 PPA install from
 this machine we'll start using the hand-build python-2.7 instead.

The Python from PPA wasn't at fault here. It seems it just exhibits a
rare configuration where sizeof(int) != sizeof(pointer).

Please feel free to move back to the PPA build. I fixed the real issue
in the code.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Zope Toolkit - 1.0.3 and 1.1.2 released

2011-06-09 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi.

On behalf of the Zope Toolkit release team and the Zope community, I'm
happy to announce the release of the Zope Toolkit 1.0.3 and 1.1.2.

Both releases are minor bugfix releases containing the fixes we did since April.

To use the new release, you can use:

[buildout]
extends =
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.3/ztk-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.0.3/zopeapp-versions.cfg

or:

[buildout]
extends =
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.2/ztk-versions.cfg
 http://download.zope.org/zopetoolkit/index/1.1.2/zopeapp-versions.cfg

Kind regards,
Hanno Schlichting
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 9, OK: 72

2011-06-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
 [1]    FAILED  Zope Buildbot / zope2.13-py2.7 slave-ubuntu64
        https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-June/042535.html


 [2]    FAILED  Zope Buildbot / zope2.14-py2.7 slave-ubuntu64
        https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-June/042537.html

 These two are both the segfault-at-exit issue.

I finally took the time to install me a virtual machine with Ubuntu
64bit on it. And I was able to reproduce the issue!

It's not a segfault at exit, but actually happens inside a test:

test_interfaces (Acquisition.tests) (0.001 s)
test_mixed_explicit_and_explicit (Acquisition.tests)Segmentation fault

Or to get the issue quicker:

$ bin/alltests -s Acquisition -t test_mixed_explicit_and_explicit
Running zope.testrunner.layer.UnitTests tests:
  Set up zope.testrunner.layer.UnitTests in 0.000 seconds.
Segmentation fault

I haven't yet tried to debug the problem itself.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 9, OK: 72

2011-06-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote:
 Or to get the issue quicker:

 $ bin/alltests -s Acquisition -t test_mixed_explicit_and_explicit
 Running zope.testrunner.layer.UnitTests tests:
  Set up zope.testrunner.layer.UnitTests in 0.000 seconds.
 Segmentation fault

 I haven't yet tried to debug the problem itself.

Here's some more info:

The last successful build was #256 on Wed Apr 27 02:06:59 2011 which
build revision 121465
The first failing build was #257 on Wed Apr 27 15:19:46 2011 which
build revision 121473

Looking at the SVN changelog of Zope trunk, there were changes in
r121460 and r121502.

So the two builds used the exact same code, but still produced a
different result. So it must be a change in the config of the
buildslave that triggered this. There's no Python 2.7 release anywhere
close to April this year, so I'm pretty sure both builds used the same
Python 2.7.1.

What caused the failure is a mystery to me.

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 9, OK: 72

2011-06-05 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote:
 $ bin/alltests -s Acquisition -t test_mixed_explicit_and_explicit
 Running zope.testrunner.layer.UnitTests tests:
  Set up zope.testrunner.layer.UnitTests in 0.000 seconds.
 Segmentation fault

 Here's some more info:

 The last successful build was #256 on Wed Apr 27 02:06:59 2011 which
 build revision 121465
 The first failing build was #257 on Wed Apr 27 15:19:46 2011 which
 build revision 121473

 Looking at the SVN changelog of Zope trunk, there were changes in
 r121460 and r121502.

 So the two builds used the exact same code, but still produced a
 different result. So it must be a change in the config of the
 buildslave that triggered this. There's no Python 2.7 release anywhere
 close to April this year, so I'm pretty sure both builds used the same
 Python 2.7.1.

 What caused the failure is a mystery to me.

I see that Jan-Jaap did some unrelated changes to the buildslave
config on that day
(http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/121467/Sandbox/janjaapdriessen/buildbot).

Jan-Jaap: Do you remember doing anything else on that day? Like
upgrading the operating system, installing new OS packages or anything
that could cause the sudden failure?

Hanno
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >