Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Vincent Fretin
On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Hi there, Of course what applies to Hanno should apply to others making releases of packages maintained by the Zope Toolkit project as well. I think the ZTK leadership should figure out some kind of guidelines for

Re: [Zope-dev] zope.exceptiosn release has no relaese date

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Lennart Regebro wrote: I thought it was painless already, but maybe I was wrong. :) It's very nice to be able to do a full release by just typing 'fullrelease' and saying 'yes' a number of times. The tool made a convert out of me, and I know others who also were pleased by how much it sped

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Vincent Fretin wrote: For the tool, I think I did it already. I modified one of Hanno's script some times ago: cd zopetoolkit/trunk bin/buildout -c checknew.cfg bin/python checknew.py Cool! This tool should be documented if it isn't already. Why is this in a separate .cfg unlike the other

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hanno Schlichting wrote: Good evening :) If you have a specific issue with me, you might contact me in private. But with your follow-ups this turned into a more general issue. No, I think this needs to be public as the ZTK is a public project that I care about. And you're not playing your

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Wichert Akkerman
On 5/3/10 12:20 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Hanno Schlichting wrote: Good evening :) If you have a specific issue with me, you might contact me in private. But with your follow-ups this turned into a more general issue. No, I think this needs to be public as the ZTK is a public project that I

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Hanno Schlichting wrote: I expect us to define the process around package releases and updating the ZTK. It's not entirely clear to me who should and who is allowed to update the ZTK definition. We'll figure things out and once we have I'll stick to the rules. My few cents: I

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Wichert Akkerman
On 5/3/10 12:34 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Hi there, Hanno Schlichting wrote: I expect us to define the process around package releases and updating the ZTK. It's not entirely clear to me who should and who is allowed to update the ZTK definition. We'll figure things out and once we have I'll

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Wichert Akkerman wrote: Can we please not rehash an old discussion or make this personal? This has all been discussed too often already. As far as I know, I've *never* discussed this fork on this list, but I might be wrong; feel free to dig the archives. But that doesn't matter: the fork is

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Wichert Akkerman wrote: I suggest that we wait impatiently for the ZTK steering committee to come up with a useful policy instead of trying to do their work when none of us volunteered for the task. I don't understand your suggestion. Could you rephrase it? I'm a ZTK user, and I'm

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Wichert Akkerman
On 5/3/10 12:52 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: I suggest that we wait impatiently for the ZTK steering committee to come up with a useful policy instead of trying to do their work when none of us volunteered for the task. I don't understand your suggestion. Could you

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Martijn Faassen wrote: [snip] Why is this in a separate .cfg unlike the other tools that come with the ZTK? Unless creating this extra script is very expensive, I think it makes sense to generate it in 'bin' along with the rest of the scripts. To expand on that, it'd be nice if it were also

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Wichert Akkerman wrote: On 5/3/10 12:51 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: Can we please not rehash an old discussion or make this personal? This has all been discussed too often already. As far as I know, I've *never* discussed this fork on this list, but I might be wrong;

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Wichert Akkerman
On 5/3/10 13:07 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: On 5/3/10 12:51 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: Can we please not rehash an old discussion or make this personal? This has all been discussed too often already. As far as I know, I've *never* discussed this

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Wichert Akkerman wrote: On 5/3/10 12:52 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: I suggest that we wait impatiently for the ZTK steering committee to come up with a useful policy instead of trying to do their work when none of us volunteered for the task. I don't understand your

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Wichert Akkerman wrote: Sorry, my mistake. I meant the ZTK release manage group, not the now defunct ZTK steering group, If it's defunct someone better update the documentation. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org

Re: [Zope-dev] zope.exceptiosn release has no relaese date

2010-05-03 Thread Baiju M
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Lennart Regebro wrote: I thought it was painless already, but maybe I was wrong. :) It's very nice to be able to do a full release by just typing 'fullrelease' and saying 'yes' a number of times. The tool made a

[Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Zope Tests Summarizer
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Sun May 2 12:00:00 2010 UTC to Mon May 3 12:00:00 2010 UTC. There were 16 messages: 6 from Zope Tests, 9 from ccomb at free.fr, 1 from ct at gocept.com. Test failures - Subject: FAILED: Repository policy check found errors in 670

[Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Because my suggestions (besides the fork issue) as a ZTK user/contributor were scattered through the thread, here's a handy summary: * please construct guidelines for updating the ZTK when making a release of a package that's managed by the ZTK project. It's useful people test

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 13:22, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: Sorry, my mistake. I meant the ZTK release manage group, not the now defunct ZTK steering group, Well, if it's defunct or not is up to the members of the steering group. The steering group

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Hanno Schlichting
Hi Martijn, On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Because my suggestions (besides the fork issue) as a ZTK user/contributor were scattered through the thread, here's a handy summary: Thank you very much for your suggestions. I'm sure the release team

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Lennart Regebro wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 13:22, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: Sorry, my mistake. I meant the ZTK release manage group, not the now defunct ZTK steering group, Well, if it's defunct or not is up to the members of the steering

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hanno Schlichting wrote: Hi Martijn, On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Because my suggestions (besides the fork issue) as a ZTK user/contributor were scattered through the thread, here's a handy summary: Thank you very much for your

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Wichert Akkerman
On 5/3/10 15:41 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Lennart Regebro wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 13:22, Martijn Faassenfaas...@startifact.com wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: Sorry, my mistake. I meant the ZTK release manage group, not the now defunct ZTK steering group, Well, if it's defunct or not

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Alex Clark
On 2010-05-03, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net wrote: On 5/3/10 15:41 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Lennart Regebro wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 13:22, Martijn Faassenfaas...@startifact.com wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: If we're going to make cheap shots: that's still a lot faster than the

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 15:41, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Well, I'm disappointed in the zope documentation process then. Work faster! :) If you don't inform people about this release manager team thingy, you can't rightly expect people like me to care about it. Heh.

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Alex Clark wrote: On 2010-05-03, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net wrote: On 5/3/10 15:41 , Martijn Faassen wrote: Lennart Regebro wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 13:22, Martijn Faassenfaas...@startifact.com wrote: Wichert Akkerman wrote: If we're going to make cheap shots: that's still a

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Lennart Regebro wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 15:41, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Well, I'm disappointed in the zope documentation process then. Work faster! :) If you don't inform people about this release manager team thingy, you can't rightly expect people like me to

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 17:30, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Answers like read the mailing list archives and we're working on it are legitimate sometimes. But they're also all too easily the answers of a bureaucracy that's stalling things as bureaucracies do. They're not very

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote: I don't know anything about the fork, but my view of the fork is that of Hanno wants a fork, Hanno can have a fork, as long as he doesn't try to poke anyones eye out with it. If it's a stupid waste of time,

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martin Aspeli
On 4 May 2010 00:09, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Hanno is making releases of packages in the ZTK. So it's not just Hanno's waste of time; it's mine too. That's where I was coming from when this discussion started. It didn't help that the action of making the fork really hurt

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martijn Faassen wrote: Hanno Schlichting wrote: Hi Martijn, On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Because my suggestions (besides the fork issue) as a ZTK user/contributor were scattered through the

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 18:09, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Hanno is making releases of packages in the ZTK. So it's not just Hanno's waste of time; it's mine too. Obviously he shouldn't hurt the main ZTK in any way. That would be a problem (even if i missed this incident

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 18:09, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Hanno is making releases of packages in the ZTK. So it's not just Hanno's waste of time; it's mine too. Obviously he shouldn't hurt

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Test failures - Subject: FAILED: Repository policy check found errors in 670 projects From: ct at gocept.com Date: Sun May 2 21:17:48 EDT 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-May/014232.html Expected

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: Breakage in the following packages, but only on Python 2.4, and only in doctests: - - zope.browserpage - - zope.viewlet - - zope.contentprovider - - zope.deferredimport At least the first one is due to doctests not

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martijn Faassen wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 18:09, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Hanno is making releases of packages in the ZTK. So it's not just Hanno's

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, Tres Seaver wrote: One issue with insta-updates to ztk.cfg is that ongoing development of a package can be in real tension with the needs of ZTK consumers for stability in the package set. Since there are no ZTK releases Grok and BlueBream gain stability by pinning to a

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Charlie Clark
Am 03.05.2010, 19:59 Uhr, schrieb Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com: I haven't seen a plausible reason why the fork should be necessary. It just uses some updated versions of packages (mostly bugfix releases) that would have been updated in the ZTK as well if people had bothered to

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey, Tres Seaver wrote: [snip] I expect to see Zope2 trunk move to using the ZTK versions list quite soon: more than that, I'm willing to to the work to see that it happens (verifying that everything passes / works with the change), and give Hanno the patch to make it so, assuming he doesn't

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Charlie Clark
Am 03.05.2010, 20:06 Uhr, schrieb Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu: Hhm. I'm inclined to drop 2.4 support here. Using a zope.testing that tries to be compatible all the way from 2.4 to 3.1 is quite a bit of a stretch. +1 Python 2.4 itself is on life-support only*. I know it's an abrupt

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 20:13, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Since there are no ZTK releases Grok and BlueBream gain stability by pinning to a particular revision of ztk.cfg (and moving it forward when needed). Zope 2 could easily do the same. If more is needed, then a branch or

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 20:02, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: At least the first one is due to doctests not exposing an '__file__' in their faux-module globals under 2.4.  We might need to add Lennart's monkeypatch under 2.4, or else drop 2.4 support altogether. Well, I don't want a

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Charlie Clark wrote: FWIW this is a very poor strategy to win people over to your point of view. I'm not trying to win over people to my point of view. I tried that last year, but people just forked when they couldn't work it out with me. I've learned that rash actions without consideration

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Lennart Regebro wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 20:13, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Since there are no ZTK releases Grok and BlueBream gain stability by pinning to a particular revision of ztk.cfg (and moving it forward when needed). Zope 2 could easily do the same. If more is

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Last december Hanno made progress on the ZTK's dependency structure, removing a lot of dependencies on packages. In his enthusiasm, he unilaterally just removed all those suddenly-unneeded (by him!) packages from the

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 21:57, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: I think the list needs to commit to something If it needs to commit to what packages are included, then there is no reason to call it an alpha, and also, we can't do it now. So then the status persists with the users of

[Zope-dev] ztk checknew script

2010-05-03 Thread Christophe Combelles
Vincent Fretin a écrit : On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Hi there, Of course what applies to Hanno should apply to others making releases of packages maintained by the Zope Toolkit project as well. I think the ZTK leadership should figure out

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi there, On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Last december Hanno made progress on the ZTK's dependency structure, removing a lot of dependencies on packages. In his

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Christophe Combelles
Thanks for these suggestions. This is *exactly* what we (the ztk release team) need. Are there other recommendations from other people? Martijn Faassen a écrit : Hi there, Because my suggestions (besides the fork issue) as a ZTK user/contributor were scattered through the thread, here's a

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Christophe Combelles
Hanno Schlichting a écrit : On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: Breakage in the following packages, but only on Python 2.4, and only in doctests: - - zope.browserpage - - zope.viewlet - - zope.contentprovider - - zope.deferredimport At least the first

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Hanno Schlichting
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:41 AM, Christophe Combelles cc...@free.fr wrote: Hanno Schlichting a écrit : Hhm. I'm inclined to drop 2.4 support here. Using a zope.testing that tries to be compatible all the way from 2.4 to 3.1 is quite a bit of a stretch. Unless I missed something, the ZTK was

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey, Christophe Combelles wrote: Thanks for these suggestions. This is *exactly* what we (the ztk release team) need. How wonderfully diplomatic and constructive, my compliments! The release team (you, Hanno and JW) look good to me. * please let these guidelines not block most updates by

Re: [Zope-dev] summary of suggestions

2010-05-03 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hi again, One more suggestion I can make is a way to get an integrated changelog for lists of packages such as the ZTK. Right now it's hard to track what kind of changes there have been in the ZTK as a whole; you have to go through all packages. If there were a way to generate a unified

Re: [Zope-dev] Hanno, please update the ZTK

2010-05-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hanno Schlichting wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote: Last december Hanno made progress on the ZTK's dependency structure, removing a lot of dependencies on packages. In his enthusiasm, he

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Christophe Combelles wrote: Hanno Schlichting a écrit : On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: Breakage in the following packages, but only on Python 2.4, and only in doctests: - - zope.browserpage - -

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 10 OK, 4 Failed, 2 Unknown

2010-05-03 Thread Baiju M
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote: Dropping Python 2.4 supports makes most sense to me at this stage. Zope2/Plone only support Python 2.6 for any modern version. I don't know what BlueBream and Grok want to support, but would guess they aim for Python

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: Zope/trunk/versions.cfg Group versions by the 'sets' to which they correspond.

2010-05-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tres Seaver wrote: Log message for revision 111904: Group versions by the 'sets' to which they correspond. Changed: U Zope/trunk/versions.cfg -=- Modified: Zope/trunk/versions.cfg

Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: Zope/trunk/versions.cfg Group versions by the 'sets' to which they correspond.

2010-05-03 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tres Seaver wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: Log message for revision 111904: Group versions by the 'sets' to which they correspond. Changed: U Zope/trunk/versions.cfg -=- Modified: Zope/trunk/versions.cfg