Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-06 Thread Fred L. Drake, Jr.

On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 17:27, Jamie Heilman wrote:
  In 2.3 you can no longer declare new classes in a Script object.  It
  bitches about a lack of __name__ attribute.  I haven't really had the
  time to look into it closely, but it does effect the examples shipped
  with zope, and actually its just a very useful thing to be able to do.
  Whatever this problem stems from, there will probably be more because
  of it.

In Python 2.3.x, when a class is defined the __name__ of the
encompassing module is looked up.  I suspect Python Scripts can be
fixed by defining __name__ in the globals dictionary in which the code
is executed.


  -Fred

-- 
Fred L. Drake, Jr.  fred at zope.com
PythonLabs at Zope Corporation

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


RE: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-06 Thread Tim Peters
[Fred L. Drake, Jr.]
 In Python 2.3.x, when a class is defined the __name__ of the
 encompassing module is looked up.  I suspect Python Scripts can be
 fixed by defining __name__ in the globals dictionary in which the code
 is executed.

Thanks, Fred!  I added this info to the collector entry:

http://collector.zope.org/Zope/1074

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-05 Thread Chris McDonough
OK, I will add this to the collector, thank you!

On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 17:27, Jamie Heilman wrote:
 Chris McDonough wrote:
  OK, sounds like a slam dunk to me.
 
 I think its a fine idea (finally secure temporary files!), but let me
 present the first bug I've run into with 2.3 (I've been testing with
 it).
 
 In 2.3 you can no longer declare new classes in a Script object.  It
 bitches about a lack of __name__ attribute.  I haven't really had the
 time to look into it closely, but it does effect the examples shipped
 with zope, and actually its just a very useful thing to be able to do.
 Whatever this problem stems from, there will probably be more because
 of it.


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-04 Thread Florian Lindner
Chris McDonough wrote:

Some people at ZC have made pretty compelling arguments to make Python
2.3.2 the recommended version of Python to use with Zope 2.7 final. 
I'm wondering if other people have a strong feeling about this either
way.
By the way: When is 2.7 supposed to be released?
Thanks,
Florian
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-03 Thread george donnelly
[Chris McDonough wrote ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on 10/3/03 9:21 AM]

 Some people at ZC have made pretty compelling arguments to make Python
 2.3.2 the recommended version of Python to use with Zope 2.7 final.
 I'm wondering if other people have a strong feeling about this either
 way.

yes please. :) python 2.3 seems a lot faster to me and even quite stable so
far.

or did you mean 2.2.3?

fwiw, i built zope 2.7.0b2 with python2.3 on freebsd 5.0 a couple days ago
without problem and its now serving several medium-traffic CMF sites stably
and with very little if any mem leakage.

--
george donnelly ~ http://www.zettai.net/ ~ Quality Zope Hosting
Shared and Dedicated Zope Hosting ~ Zope Servers ~ Zope Websites
Yahoo, AIM: zettainet ~ ICQ: 51907738 ~ Sales (USA): 1-866-967-3669


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-03 Thread BZ
No strong feeling other than I don't have it installed yet.

I spent awhile playing with 2.7b2 and python 2.3 with no issues.

BZ

 Some people at ZC have made pretty compelling arguments to make Python
 2.3.2 the recommended version of Python to use with Zope 2.7 final.
 I'm wondering if other people have a strong feeling about this either
 way.

 --
 Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Zope Corporation


 ___
 Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
 **   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
 (Related lists -
  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )



___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


RE: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-03 Thread Tim Peters
[Chris McDonough]
 Some people at ZC have made pretty compelling arguments to make
 Python 2.3.2 the recommended version of Python to use with Zope 2.7
 final.  I'm wondering if other people have a strong feeling about
 this either way.

[george donnelly]
 yes please. :) python 2.3 seems a lot faster to me and even quite
 stable so far.

 or did you mean 2.2.3?

Chris did mean 2.3.2, which is still unfamiliar to most because it was just
released today:

http://www.python.org/2.3.2/

This came very soon after the 2.3.1 release, and just fixes a few gross but
obscure platform-specific packaging mistakes in 2.3.1.  In reality and with
benefit of hindsight, what was released as 2.3.1 should have been released
as 2.3.1c1 (release candidate 1), and then 2.3.2 should have been released
as 2.3.1 final.

Regardless, 2.3.2 is the best Python in existence (by any criterion other
than identical to 1.5.2 wink).


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


RE: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-03 Thread Chris McDonough
OK, sounds like a slam dunk to me.

I have changed the Zope 2.7 windows builder to use Python 2.3.2 and I
have changed the source version configure script to look for 2.3.2 as
it's optimal version.  This all appears to work.

Once an RPM is released for Python 2.3.2, I'll change the spec file for
the Zope RPM release to depend on that instead of a 2.2.3 RPM.

Currently, Zope still claims it works with 2.2.X (via the configure
script's acceptable versions feature).  Should we continue to make
that claim true by not depending on any Python 2.3-specific features in
the Zope core?  I don't think there are a lot of super-compelling core
and/or library differences between Pythons 2.3.2 and 2.2.3 that would
make this a hardship on core Zope developers.

- C


On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 11:30, Tim Peters wrote:
 [Chris McDonough]
  Some people at ZC have made pretty compelling arguments to make
  Python 2.3.2 the recommended version of Python to use with Zope 2.7
  final.  I'm wondering if other people have a strong feeling about
  this either way.
 
 [george donnelly]
  yes please. :) python 2.3 seems a lot faster to me and even quite
  stable so far.
 
  or did you mean 2.2.3?
 
 Chris did mean 2.3.2, which is still unfamiliar to most because it was just
 released today:
 
 http://www.python.org/2.3.2/
 
 This came very soon after the 2.3.1 release, and just fixes a few gross but
 obscure platform-specific packaging mistakes in 2.3.1.  In reality and with
 benefit of hindsight, what was released as 2.3.1 should have been released
 as 2.3.1c1 (release candidate 1), and then 2.3.2 should have been released
 as 2.3.1 final.
 
 Regardless, 2.3.2 is the best Python in existence (by any criterion other
 than identical to 1.5.2 wink).
 
 
 ___
 Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
 **   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
 (Related lists - 
  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
-- 
Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zope Corporation


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


RE: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-03 Thread Fred L. Drake, Jr.

Chris McDonough writes:
  Currently, Zope still claims it works with 2.2.X (via the configure
  script's acceptable versions feature).  Should we continue to make
  that claim true by not depending on any Python 2.3-specific features in
  the Zope core?  I don't think there are a lot of super-compelling core
  and/or library differences between Pythons 2.3.2 and 2.2.3 that would
  make this a hardship on core Zope developers.

Requiring 2.3 (any flavor) would allow us to drop the copy of the
logging package from Zope 2.7 and newer.

There are greater benefits for Zope 3, where we have several modules
and packages laying around that would no longer be needed (logging,
csv, gettext).

I also don't know that we should consider 2.3.1 acceptable for any
version of Zope.


  -Fred

-- 
Fred L. Drake, Jr.  fred at zope.com
PythonLabs at Zope Corporation

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


RE: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-03 Thread Tim Peters
[Chris McDonough]
 Currently, Zope still claims it works with 2.2.X (via the configure
 script's acceptable versions feature).

Actually, 2.2, 2.2.1, and 2.2.2 aren't acceptable for Zope even now, because
of Zope-critical Python bugs first fixed in 2.2.3.  There's no version of
2.2 with a fix for the rare RH9 Unicode-segfault bug Jeremy stumbled into a
few weeks ago (while running Zope tests), and there may never be.

 Should we continue to make that claim true by not depending on any
 Python 2.3-specific features in the Zope core?  I don't think
 there are a lot of super-compelling core and/or library differences
 between Pythons 2.3.2 and 2.2.3 that would make this a hardship on
 core Zope developers.

I don't know whether it's a hardship for anyone to install 2.3.2 but not to
install 2.2.3.  Seems unlikely wink.  In the spambayes project, we've
found that people just can't stop themselves from using the new-in-2.3
enumerate() builtin, and the new-in-2.3 Sets module.  They're generally
useful.  Since 2.2.3 is slower and buggier than 2.3.2, and may be the last
of the 2.2 line, I'm not sure we'd be doing anyone a real favor by
facilitating hanging on to 2.2.3.

[Fred L. Drake, Jr.]
 Requiring 2.3 (any flavor) would allow us to drop the copy of the
 logging package from Zope 2.7 and newer.

 There are greater benefits for Zope 3, where we have several modules
 and packages laying around that would no longer be needed (logging,
 csv, gettext).

Plus I copy 2.3's strptime.py module into Zope3 now (and have to edit it
each time I synch up to get rid of its enumerate() call), and Zope3 has a
different all-Python implementation of the new-in-2.3 all-C datetime module.
The C version of datetime is more desirable due to its comparative memory
frugality.

One more:  We're trying to move toward replacing ExtensionClass with
new-style classes.  This is straightforward under 2.3, but there's still a
relevant glitch in 2.2.3 that appears to make it much harder (that's why the
code on zodb3-devel-branch works fine under 2.3 but segfaults left and right
under 2.2.3; zodb3-devel-branch is quiet now, but will probably become
important again).

 I also don't know that we should consider 2.3.1 acceptable for any
 version of Zope.

2.3.1 is missing os.fsync() on POSIX systems (a gross mistake that snuck
into 2.3.1), and MvL's arguments notwithstanding, ZODB wants to use
os.fsync() on POSIX systems.  2.3.1 was a mistake, but a mistake that got
fixed quickly.


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-03 Thread Jamie Heilman
Chris McDonough wrote:
 OK, sounds like a slam dunk to me.

I think its a fine idea (finally secure temporary files!), but let me
present the first bug I've run into with 2.3 (I've been testing with
it).

In 2.3 you can no longer declare new classes in a Script object.  It
bitches about a lack of __name__ attribute.  I haven't really had the
time to look into it closely, but it does effect the examples shipped
with zope, and actually its just a very useful thing to be able to do.
Whatever this problem stems from, there will probably be more because
of it.

-- 
Jamie Heilman http://audible.transient.net/~jamie/
You came all this way, without saying squat, and now you're trying
 to tell me a '56 Chevy can beat a '47 Buick in a dead quarter mile?
 I liked you better when you weren't saying squat kid. -Buddy

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Using 2.3.2 for Zope 2.7

2003-10-03 Thread Anthony Baxter

 Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote
 
 Requiring 2.3 (any flavor) would allow us to drop the copy of the
 logging package from Zope 2.7 and newer.
 
 There are greater benefits for Zope 3, where we have several modules
 and packages laying around that would no longer be needed (logging,
 csv, gettext).

Don't forget you also get the C version of datetime.

 I also don't know that we should consider 2.3.1 acceptable for any
 version of Zope.

Meh. 2.3.1 gets a bad rap. Aside from the fsync problem, there's nothing
fundamentally broken about it.

Anthony

-- 
Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED]   
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )