[Zope-dev] Editing DTML Documents

2001-02-20 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
supporting WebDAV? Any suggestions welcome! Phil -- Philipp von Weitershausen [ *pronounce: "fun Viters-houzen" ] http://www.philikon.de/ ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No c

[Zope-dev] Error message traceback

2001-02-22 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Hi there, how do I turn off this annoying traceback that is always printed out when an error occurrs? -- Philipp von Weitershausen [ *pronounce: "fun Viters-houzen" ] Web http://www.philikon.de/ ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL

[Zope-dev] Authentication

2001-03-03 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
ions. Thanks in advance Phil. -- Philipp von Weitershausen [ *pronounce: "fun Viters-houzen" ] Web http://www.philikon.de ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HT

Re: [Zope-dev] Dynamically add an external method at startup

2002-06-03 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Hi, def addExternalMethod(self, id, title, module, function, REQUEST=None): Add an external method to a folder id=str(id) title=str(title) module=str(module) function=str(function) i=ExternalMethod(id,title,module,function) #self._setObject(id,i) I don't get

[Zope-dev] Re: Renaming a product

2003-06-18 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Clemens Robbenhaar wrote: The actual work is the transformation of instances of class A.Foo to class B.Foo; to be on the safe side one would have to copy over all attributes manually. If You want to try a fast and dirty solution, You could try to write the new class into the '__class__' attribute

[Zope-dev] Re: TALES idea: tuple unpacking

2003-07-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Richard Jones wrote: During the Melbourne Zope3 Sprint, someone ran up against a situation where they'd have liked to have TALES perform a tuple unpacking like Python can. I've just run into a similar situation :) Say a method listFilesByUser returns a list of (user, [files]) it'd be nice to

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: TALES idea: tuple unpacking

2003-07-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Shane Hathaway wrote: Here's the way I'd like to spell it: div tal:repeat=user_files here/listFilesByUser User: span tal:replace=user_files/int:0 / File: span tal:replace=user_files/int:1 / /div +1 We've come up with a number of generally useful prefixes, BTW. Off the top of my

[Zope-dev] Re: TALES idea: tuple unpacking

2003-07-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jean Jordaan wrote: int:-- Look up an item by index Hate this. Looks like a typecast of some kind, int is way to overused Aesthetically, I also find it ugly. The attractiveness of a *path* expression lies in its resemblance to a *path*. True, but we've obviously reached a point where a

[Zope-dev] Re: TALES idea: tuple unpacking

2003-07-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Evan Simpson wrote: Hmmm. I hadn't thought of that before, but I've certainly wanted to tell the path traverser whether to use attribute, index, or key access on several occasions (using 'items' as a dictionary key bites me regularly). I can imagine the pain. Explicit is better than implicit.

[Zope-dev] Re: Problem with Zope 2.7.0-b1

2003-07-25 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jean Baltus wrote: Hi all, The problem I describe here does NOT appear with Zope 2.6.1, nor Zope 2.6.2b4, only with Zope 2.7. I installed Zope 2.7 with CMF 1.4, Plone 1.1alpha2 and TranslationService 0.4. When I create a Plone site (called dice here) Ive got the following error: ... *

[Zope-dev] Re: CVS: Zope/lib/python/TAL - TALGenerator.py:1.65

2003-07-25 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Chris McDonough wrote: Update of /cvs-repository/Zope/lib/python/TAL In directory cvs.zope.org:/tmp/cvs-serv15492/lib/python/TAL Modified Files: TALGenerator.py Log Message: Merge TAL i18n fixes which break CMF to HEAD from 2.7 branch. The agreement Jim was basically that this backward

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: CVS: Zope/lib/python/TAL - TALGenerator.py:1.65

2003-07-26 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Quoting Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hmm. Without this fix, many CMFDefault (and possibly CMFCore) skins don't work. Is there a way to fix the offending CMF skins so that it works under Zope versions both with this fix and without (so we don't need two versions of CMF)? More

[Zope-dev] Re: CVS: Zope3/src/zope/tal - talparser.py:1.6

2004-04-08 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Gintautas Miliauskas wrote: Update of /cvs-repository/Zope3/src/zope/tal In directory cvs.zope.org:/tmp/cvs-serv27951/src/zope/tal Modified Files: talparser.py Log Message: Removed an assertion which disallows usage of Zope3 i18n in XML markup. Added a few test cases which run the new code

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope and zope

2004-04-14 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: The first question is: Is it a problem to have two packages with names differing only in case? I don't see a problem at all; IIRC, we agreed that the backports from Zope3 would live in a 'src' directory, while Zope 2 stuff continues to live in 'lib/python'. No case problem

[Zope-dev] Re: More arguments for z (was Re: Zope and zope)

2004-04-15 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim, let's make this telegraph style :) OK, here's another. What about renaming the Zope 3 zope package to z. +1 - It fits with the expansion of Zope: Z Object Publishing Environment. - It's short :) - *At this time* (but after the move to svn), it's not too hard to make a change like

[Zope-dev] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-21 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martin, Maik, Andreas, and others, I see two issues being raised in this thread: 1. Maik disagrees with the design philosophy behind Zope3 (the Component Architecture) and the place Zope3 wants to position itself at in the future. As a Zope developer who has spent the last two years both

[Zope-dev] Re: The bleak Future of Zope?!

2004-04-22 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: 2. Especially Andreas expressed his worries about the current release policy in Zope 2 and its future regarding maintainance and support. I have to say that I share some of his skepticism regarding Zope 2. I personally have never fully understood ZC's reasons for the release

[Zope-dev] Re: Proposal: Rename zope package

2004-04-22 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Why would they switch to Zope 2.8 if not for the component architecture? To stay current? To get MVCC? To get new-style extension classes, and thus access to many modern Python features. Later releases will provide benefits beyond just the Z3

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] Need help with http://dev.zope.org/Subversion

2004-04-25 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Kostyrka wrote: On Sun, Apr 25, 2004 at 12:48:30PM -0400, Fred Drake wrote: On Sunday 25 April 2004 12:29 pm, Jim Fulton wrote: cvs co svn+ssh://svn.zope.org/repos/Zope3/trunk Zope3 That should be: svn co svn+ssh://svn.zope.org/repos/Zope3/trunk Zope3 cvs co

[Zope-dev] Re: Do we need a Packages directory in the new repository

2004-04-26 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: Historically, we've had Packages, Products, Packages3 and Products3 directories in the CBS repository. I wonder of we need these going forward. Perhaps we should just have top-level projct directories in the new subversion repository. +1 Philipp

[Zope-dev] Re: status of Zope versus zope?

2004-06-04 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martijn Faassen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: I chose alternative 4 from: http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/RenameTheZopePackage As that seemed to be the most popular, although I personnally prefer 3. Resolving this peacefully is becoming more urgent for me as I'd like to be able to use

[Zope-dev] Re: status of Zope versus zope?

2004-06-04 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martijn Faassen wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: I don't understand what this means. A different directory on the python path? I would recommend leaving old Zope2 stuff in lib/python and putting all Z3-related stuff in a parallel directory called 'src'. That way

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 3 Developer's Handbook

2005-02-04 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Stephan Richter wrote: Hello everyone, I just wanted to let you all know that the first book covering Zope 3 hit the shelves yesterday. It is called the Zope 3 Developer's Handbook and was published by Sams' Developer's Library. Link to Sams Web-Site:

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 3 Developer's Handbook

2005-02-04 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Sorry for the flooding, it seemed that GMane rejected my messages because my computer clock was set month ahead (no idea why) while in fact the messages were posted. Philipp. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org

Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.8, Five and Interfaces

2005-05-04 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
interfaces were created by Philipp von Weitershausen before Tres implemented the bridging functionality. Correct. 2.) Could we move the interfaces that are currently not available as Zope 2 interfaces to the corresponding packages in Zope 2.8, using Five/interfaces.py just as an fallback for Zope

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.8, Five and Interfaces

2005-05-04 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Right. Here's what we could do: 1. Copy Five's interface definitions over to Zope 2.8 (mostly to OFS.interfaces, I guess) where they are added as Zope 2 interfaces I would prefer to reserve the name 'interfaces' for Zope 3 interfaces. So far

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope 2.8, Five and Interfaces

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martijn Faassen wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: [snip] Right. Here's what we could do: 1. Copy Five's interface definitions over to Zope 2.8 (mostly to OFS.interfaces, I guess) where they are added as Zope 2 interfaces 2. Keep Five's (redudant) interface definitions. They can

[Zope-dev] Re: relocating Zope 2 core interfaces - a proposal

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: Proposed Solution = 1.) Adding ZCML that bridges existing z2 interfaces into the 'interfaces' module of their package. [Zope 2.8.0] +1 2.) Copying z3 interfaces from Five.interfaces to the 'interfaces' module of the corresponding package. Marking those in Five as

[Zope-dev] Re: [z3-five] relocating Zope 2 core interfaces - a proposal

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: Current State = Five (now part of Zope 2.8) ships with one big interfaces.py file that contains z3 interfaces for Zope 2 core classes. (There are also some five specific interfaces in that file, but they are not subject of this proposal.) interfaces.zcml states that

[Zope-dev] Re: relocating Zope 2 core interfaces - a proposal

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martijn Faassen wrote: yuppie wrote: [snip] This way, all the work that remains for me is to merge in Five 1.0 into Zope 2.8. My point is: Doing that in a backward compatible way is impossible. So we have to do it now or never. That's true, but it's not that difficult to ask people to change

[Zope-dev] Re: [z3-five] relocating Zope 2 core interfaces - a proposal

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: I don't think we need to break backward compatability. We would just need to deprecate the Five.interfaces location. Basically, the goals are: * The solution needs to work with Zope 2.7 * Preferrably, the interface import spelling should be equal on both systems (which means a

[Zope-dev] Re: relocating Zope 2 core interfaces - a proposal

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: 4.) Making interfaces.zcml point to the new locations. [Five 1.0+] 5.) Adding unit tests that verify interfaces and implementations. [Zope 2.8.0] IMHO that's yagni. We actually don't use interfaces that much for verifying implementations anymore. I think their most common use in

[Zope-dev] Re: relocating Zope 2 core interfaces - a proposal

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: Yes. I still don't see where the need for incompatability is. Maybe I'm just blind. Can someone explain? I no longer see a problem. If we make sure the Five interfaces and those in the Zope tree are the same, there are no incompatibilities. By the way, I've just merged in Five 1.0

[Zope-dev] Re: relocating Zope 2 core interfaces - a proposal

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Tres Seaver wrote: Your unit test should exercise the whole API promised by an implementation anyway, so often an explicit interface check is redudant (of course, it can't hurt). verifyClass() per se isn't bad, it's in fact a useful indicator, but having that it as a *sole* measure whether a class

[Zope-dev] Re: relocating Zope 2 core interfaces - a proposal

2005-05-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martijn Faassen wrote: yuppie wrote: By the way, I've just merged in Five 1.0 into Zope 2.8 (which was a significant amount of work, due to all kinds of copyright headers being different). Can't we use the same headers for Five 1.0 and Zope 2.8? Both releases are ZPL 2.1, aren't they? Are there

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more vendor-neutral. I am confident that this will go through. This almost sounds as if the Foundation

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more vendor-neutral. I am confident

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 17. Juni 2005 13:04:17 +0200 Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: This is really great news! I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key players in the foundation which would make the foundation even

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Chris McDonough wrote: On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 07:52 -0400, Stephan Richter wrote: Also, I agree with Andreas and Philipp that developers should be members, not companies. Otherwise, how could I, as an independent developer, have a say? BTW, this is also positive for companies, since they can

[Zope-dev] Re: [Z3lab] Nuxeo supports Zope Corp announces

2005-06-18 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
kit blake wrote: Wow, what a difference two days makes. I heard about the ZF announcement by telephone two mornings ago, and I breathed a huge sigh of relief. It solves a problem we've been worrying about for years. It means we can sit across from a nervous IT director, and when he asks dubious

[Zope-dev] Re: last minute Zope 2.8.1 changes

2005-08-02 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: If there are no objections, I'd like to merge two changes into the Zope-2_8-branch before 2.8.1 is released: 1.) Backports from zope.tal to TAL and a small modification of ustr: http://svn.zope.org/?rev=37613view=rev http://svn.zope.org/?rev=37614view=rev This is a fix

[Zope-dev] New mailinglist for Zope 3 translators

2005-10-18 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Hello all, [Sorry for the cross-post, please CC replies to zope3-i18n@zope.org only.] two months ago, I started an initiative [1] to translate Zope 3.1 using Ubuntu's Launchpad system [2]. Since then, I've received a lot of emails from numerous volunteers around the world and many of them made

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:

2005-11-03 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: * Moved to a zpkgutils-based build system, as the Zope 3.2 extension modules require to be built with it. If everything goes ahead as planned, the release tarball will also be built with zpkgutils (some work has also been done in that direction). That part

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:

2005-11-03 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: That worked for me (though I usually don't do the configure; make dance, but just do an in-place build with python setup.py build -i; see also below). Sorry, I meant $ python setup.py build_ext -i That's what make all does on Zope 3 and now on Zope 2

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:

2005-11-03 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: What changes are those? A fresh Zope trunk checkout works for me. Here's what I did: $ svn co svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/repos/main/Zope/trunk Zope-trunk $ cd Zope-trunk $ ./configure $ make That worked for me (though I usually don't do the configure; make

[Zope-dev] Re: zope.app stitching

2005-11-04 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: We need to stitch zope.app into Zope 2 more carefully than we are now. Much of what we are stitching is unreleased in Zope3 and depends on things not stitched nto Zope 2. Among other things, this means that we can't use python2.4 test.py -m. to run all tests

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/lib/python/AccessControl/ - converted interface to z3 interface.

2005-11-05 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Yvo Schubbe wrote: Log message for revision 39903: - converted interface to z3 interface. Changed: D Zope/trunk/lib/python/AccessControl/IUserFolder.py I think we should maybe leave the Zope 2 interfaces around for at least one release. People with custom user folder implementations

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/lib/python/AccessControl/ - converted interface to z3 interface.

2005-11-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
yuppie wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Log message for revision 39903: - converted interface to z3 interface. Changed: D Zope/trunk/lib/python/AccessControl/IUserFolder.py I think we should maybe leave the Zope 2 interfaces around for at least one release. People

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/test.py Don't hard-wire forward-slash into sys.path (redux).

2005-11-14 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Tres Seaver wrote: Log message for revision 40092: Don't hard-wire forward-slash into sys.path (redux). Please don't forget to merge this and the previous rev to the Zope 2.9 branch. From now on, both the trunk and the 2.9 branch need to be taken care of. Philipp

[Zope-dev] Re: branched Zope 2.9

2005-11-14 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Florent Guillaume wrote: BTW I'm for removing the 2.9 branch for now. You didn't, so I presume 2.9 branch stays? It's important to clear the status of this branch because bugfixes need to be merged to it (see my email about Tres' bugfix, for example). By the way, in the future, just to avoid

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: branched Zope 2.9

2005-11-14 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 15. November 2005 00:20:00 +0800 Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Florent Guillaume wrote: BTW I'm for removing the 2.9 branch for now. You didn't, so I presume 2.9 branch stays? It's important to clear the status of this branch because

Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: branched Zope 2.9

2005-11-16 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 16. November 2005 14:03:05 -0500 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does this mean that the existing 2.9 branch needs to be removed and that the trunk remains frozen? Didn't Florent delete the branch? Obviously he did not as I assumed. So in this case Philipp

[Zope-dev] Zope 2 license

2005-11-18 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Hi there, Zope/doc/LICENSE.txt still is ZPL 2.0 and so are most of the file headers in the Zope 2 source code. Newer files, especially those from Five, are ZPL 2.1, though. I think it's a good time to switch the rest of Zope 2 to ZPL 2.1. That way we only have to supply one license text. Philipp

[Zope-dev] Heads up: Branch naming scheme

2005-11-18 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Hi there, quick reminder for all of you who have Zope 2.9 branch checkouts: There has been a change (finally!) in the release branch naming scheme. The 2.9 branch was renamed to Zope/branches/2.9 as a result. This will be the naming scheme for all release branches in Zope 2 and 3 from now on.

[Zope-dev] Re: RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Martijn Faassen wrote: Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 23 November 2005 10:16, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Sounds crazy, I know. But I'm serious. Looking for your comments at: http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReuniteZope2AndZope3InTheSourceCodeRepository I am -1. If I could I would

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Gary Poster wrote: Sounds crazy, I know. But I'm serious. Looking for your comments at: http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ ReuniteZope2AndZope3InTheSourceCodeRepository I already spoke with Philipp on IRC about this, but for the record, and speaking personally, and very arguably selfishly: -1.

[Zope-dev] RE: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source coderepository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Roger Ineichen wrote: Reading the response to this mail, I guess developer working on existing Zope2 projects agree on this proposal. And developer where build projects only based on Zope3 will not. As somebody how don't know Zope2 I'm -1 on this. I could repeat here what Martijn and I

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Dominik Huber [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Stephan Richter wrote: This may raise the contribution bar too high. IMO that 's the most important point. It raises the bar for Zope 3 developers a bit while lower the bar for Zope 2 developers tremendously. I'm looking at the bigger picture and see it all

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Julien Anguenot wrote: Some Zope3 developers don't care about Zope2 and this is fair enough in my point of view. Zope2 starts to get old and appears to be really a mess compared to Zope3 in *2005*, plus it's not such an attractive platform as it used to be couple of years ago. (Don't get me

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Julien Anguenot wrote: And what about the acceptance of Zope3 *outside* the Zope community ? Zope3 will look like more complicated and confusing doing a merge. Why? The 'zope' namespace package is what Zope 3 is known as to outsiders and this will not be affected. I understand your

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Stephan Richter wrote: I totally disagree. I, as a Zope 3 developer, have to learn Zope 2 and Five. What makes you think so? I, for one, have not the slightest clue of how zope.wfmc works. Still I'm able to contribute to Zope 3, am I not? If I refactor something, I might even have to touch

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 23 November 2005 22:01, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Messing up Zope 3 is specifically not the intention of this proposal. It says so explicitly in the Your questions answered section. Though it is not your intend, the merge would in fact mess up

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source coderepository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Quoting Stephan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Wednesday 23 November 2005 21:43, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: I know that you, Roger, have been contributing a lot to new exciting features in Zope 3. In doing so, you would never have to worry about Zope 2 because Zope 2 will only

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 23 November 2005 21:48, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Note that I also understand your motivation on voting -1 quite well. Leaving everything as it is is simply the easier thing to do. For the moment... I will always vote -1 on such a move. I just

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Stephan Richter wrote: On Thursday 24 November 2005 00:05, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Stephan Richter wrote: I totally disagree. I, as a Zope 3 developer, have to learn Zope 2 and Five. What makes you think so? I, for one, have not the slightest clue of how zope.wfmc works

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source coderepository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Stephan Richter wrote: On Thursday 24 November 2005 00:25, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Quoting Stephan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This would be Zope 3's death blow as we know it, because it would stall Zope 3 for several months. Why would it stall Zope 3 development? Because

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Stephan Richter wrote: On Thursday 24 November 2005 00:41, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: At least no one is expecting to make such big changes by yourself. Being stubborn and refusing to do further contributions, be they large or small, isn't going to get us anywhere. The people who

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-23 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Benji York wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Really, *how* does it mess up the trunk? Half of the packages of Zope 2 are also in Zope 3 because they're either ZODB or Zope3-related anyway. Another quarter of the packages will go away within one year Perhaps that would be a more

[Zope-dev] RE: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source coderepository

2005-11-24 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Roger Ineichen wrote: What makes you think so? I, for one, have not the slightest clue of how zope.wfmc works. Still I'm able to contribute to Zope 3, am I not? If I refactor something, I might even have to touch zope.wfmc, but for the most part this could be very superficial. That's

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-24 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Chris McDonough wrote: I really, really appreciate Phil taking the time to propose this no matter what happens. Chris, I won't bother you with a detailed answer (esp. to some points that were not quite correct about Zope 3 not caring about backward compat). I just wanted to say that I also

[Zope-dev] RE: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source coderepository

2005-11-24 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Roger Ineichen wrote: Btw, do we really count developer where are voting but never contributed to the z3 trunk? I think normaly yes. But this is a proposal where I think should be up to the Zope3 developer to decide. Uh, why only Zope3 developers? This affects the whole Zope community!

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Reunite Zope 2 and Zope 3 in the source code repository

2005-11-24 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Sounds crazy, I know. But I'm serious. Looking for your comments at: http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/ReuniteZope2AndZope3InTheSourceCodeRepository I love this idea! Ok. But I think it's still a bit too early to pursue it. Perhaps so. Other

[Zope-dev] Weird test failures with DateTime

2005-11-26 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Hi, I've recently been seeing weird DateTime test failures on all Zope 2 branches since 2.7 (see below). Any idea what I'm doing wrong? My system is OSX 10.3 with a self-compiled Python 2.4.1 (through darwinports). My system timezone, as you can see, is GMT+0800 (Beijing time). [EMAIL

[Zope-dev] Re: Weird test failures with DateTime

2005-11-26 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jens Vagelpohl wrote: Hi, I've recently been seeing weird DateTime test failures on all Zope 2 branches since 2.7 (see below). Any idea what I'm doing wrong? My system is OSX 10.3 with a self-compiled Python 2.4.1 (through darwinports). My system timezone, as you can see, is GMT+0800

[Zope-dev] Re: Weird test failures with DateTime

2005-11-27 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: I've recently been seeing weird DateTime test failures on all Zope 2 branches since 2.7 (see below). Any idea what I'm doing wrong? My system is OSX 10.3 with a self-compiled Python 2.4.1 (through darwinports). My system timezone, as you can see, is GMT+0800

[Zope-dev] Re: Weird test failures with DateTime

2005-11-27 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On 26 Nov 2005, at 15:07, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: However, I am noticing that on the current Zope 2.9 branch, trying to build the software fails completely. The configure script works fine, but the make step does not seem to do anything at all. Yes

[Zope-dev] Re: Weird test failures with DateTime

2005-11-27 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Alexander Limi wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: I've recently been seeing weird DateTime test failures on all Zope 2 branches since 2.7 (see below). Any idea what I'm doing wrong? My system is OSX 10.3 with a self-compiled Python 2.4.1 (through darwinports). My system timezone

[Zope-dev] Re: DateTime mess

2005-11-29 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Tres Seaver wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Andrew Milton wrote: -1 for any scheme that involves diddling the ZODB to 'fix' pickles, because you just know you're going to corrupt someone's ZODB, and that's just noone's idea of fun. There are sensible ways of upgrading

[Zope-dev] Re: Python2.4 Security Audit ETA???

2005-11-30 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Jung wrote: --On 29. November 2005 15:13:45 +0100 Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The security audit already happened, and led to checkins by Jim on October 26 that preceded the release of Zope 2.8.4. Zope 2.8.4 is safe to use with python 2.4. Let's say it this

[Zope-dev] Re: DateTime mess

2005-11-30 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Tres Seaver wrote: Frankly, anything which attempts to fix pickles in-place smells bad to me. Dump and reload is how the RDBMS world handles this kind of problem, and it isn't because they don't have smart folks working on them. You're right, as nice as generations might be, they can't

[Zope-dev] Short tutorial on I18n with Five

2005-12-01 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
I'm happy to announce that I've finally managed to document the internationalization (i18n) features that Five has brought to the Zope 2 world since version 1.1: http://worldcookery.com/files/fivei18n This short tutorial compares current Zope-2-based solutions to the i18n problem with the Zope 3

[Zope-dev] Re: zLOG deprecation?

2005-12-05 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Chris Withers wrote: Is zLOG deprecated? If not, it should be... +10 zLOG/__init__.py says: Note: This module exists only for backward compatibility. Any new code for Zope 2.8 and newer should use the logging module from Python's standard library directly. zLOG is only an

[Zope-dev] Re: toplevel products folder in zope svn ?

2005-12-05 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Rocky Burt wrote: Anyone know if there is any plan to add a toplevel products folder in the zope svn repo like there currently is in zope's cvs repo? I know this has held up a few products from going from zope CVS to SVN. I don't think a separate Products folder is is necessary. Just make

[Zope-dev] Re: zLOG deprecation?

2005-12-05 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Chris Withers wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: If not, it should be... +10 Yeah, me too! Hence why I was asking ;-) That means we could deprecate it even in Zope 2.9, using zLOG has already been discouraged in Zope 2.8. Cool, Andreas, can you make it start emitting

[Zope-dev] version.txt [was: make sdist]

2005-12-05 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Jung wrote: make sdist: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/sandboxes/Zope-2.9/2.9.0b1: make sdist zpkg -C /develop/sandboxes/Zope-2.9/2.9.0b1/releases/Zope2.cfg 'version.txt' doesn't match any files in collection (in /develop/sandboxes/Zope-2.9/2.9.0b1/lib/python/zope/app/PACKAGE.cfg)

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/branches/2.9/ deprecated FastCGI

2005-12-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Jung wrote: Log message for revision 40469: deprecated FastCGI Changed: U Zope/branches/2.9/doc/CHANGES.txt U Zope/branches/2.9/doc/WEBSERVER.txt U Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/ZServer/datatypes.py [snip] Modified:

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/branches/2.9/ deprecated FastCGI

2005-12-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: this checkin made the tests fail for the build-bot (http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003728.html). Since you didn't use stacklevel=2 in the warnings.warn() call, it's hard to see where FCGIServerFactory() is called from. Maybe tests? I

[Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/branches/2.9/ deprecated FastCGI

2005-12-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: this checkin made the tests fail for the build-bot (http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2005-December/003728.html). Since you didn't use stacklevel=2 in the warnings.warn() call, it's hard to see where FCGIServerFactory

[Zope-dev] Re: version.txt [was: make sdist]

2005-12-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: This is a very recent problem and a result of Jim's inconsistent handling of the version.txt matter yesterday. http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/MakingARelease says that zope.app/version.txt should be created on a tag and zope.app/PACKAGE.cfg should also be modified to include

[Zope-dev] Re: version.txt [was: make sdist]

2005-12-06 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: This is a very recent problem and a result of Jim's inconsistent handling of the version.txt matter yesterday. http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/MakingARelease says that zope.app/version.txt should be created on a tag and zope.app/PACKAGE.cfg should also be modified to include

[Zope-dev] Re: zLOG deprecation?

2005-12-07 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Chris Withers wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: This would probably best be handled by one person, so if you are willing to do all the grepping and updating, making zLOG deprecated would just be a minor operation :). ...but one i don't know how to perform. What code would I

[Zope-dev] Re: RFC: Locale-specific Text Collation

2005-12-12 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: When presenting users with ordered text (e.g. sorted lists of options), simply sorting Unicode strings doesn't provide an ordering that users in a given locale will find useful. Various languages have text sorting conventions that don't agree with the ordering of Unicode

[Zope-dev] Re: make test fails on 2.9.0-b1?

2005-12-12 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Andreas Jung wrote: The build process changed in 2.9. Perhaps make inplace; make test should work. He explicity said in a tarball. make inplace only exists in SVN. As a reminder: SVN repo != release tarball I know it's always been '==' for every other Zope 2 version, but 2.9 is different

[Zope-dev] Re: make test fails on 2.9.0-b1?

2005-12-12 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Paul Winkler wrote: On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 05:40:27AM +0100, Andreas Jung wrote: The build process changed in 2.9. Perhaps make inplace; make test should work. -aj Good thought, but there is no inplace target anymore. Yup, Andreas was referring to the SVN checkout. What is now the

[Zope-dev] Re: Imports broken on 2.9.0-b1?

2005-12-12 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Tino Wildenhain wrote: Am Sonntag, den 11.12.2005, 23:19 -0500 schrieb Paul Winkler: Another quickie problem report - no time to investigate further right now, but can anybody else reproduce? If so, I'll try to fix tomorrow... In a fresh 2.9.0-b1 instance, made via bin/mkzopeinstance, I get

[Zope-dev] Re: '-C' in REQUEST.form ?

2005-12-17 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Florent Guillaume wrote: I have a strange thing in Zope 2.8 and Zope 2.9 I never noticed. {'-C': ''} is present in REQUEST.form for a GET request without arguments. A simple script showrequest with return repr (context.REQUEST.form) shows it. A bit of digging shows this is due to cgi.py

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Unit Test Failures

2005-12-19 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Jim Fulton wrote: This is really just a matter of knowing how to write the test. Generally, when you want to show a dict sample, the way to do it is with: from zope.testing/doctestunit import pprint pprint(thisdict) This formats the dictionary nicely and, most importantly, sorts the

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Unit Test Failures

2005-12-19 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Tim Peters wrote: I'm not sure what it is testing, either; CC'ing Phillip, whose fingerprints are on it, according the 'svn blame', for clarification. These tests have always failed, and Phillip doesn't know why. Because they were failing, he changed them to run at level 2. That's not

[Zope-dev] Re: Unit Test Failures

2005-12-19 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
[resending this from the right address, the original posting got swallowed by Mailman] Tres Seaver wrote: Benji York wrote: The Zope2 unit tests have been failing for some time on buildbot.zope.com. Looks like a Five-related problem:

[Zope-dev] Re: Unit Test Failures

2005-12-19 Thread Philipp von Weitershausen
Tres Seaver wrote: Well, if you look closer you find that it uses pprint.pformat which always outputs the same on all machines (because it provides output sorted by the dictionary key). I see that in the implementation; it isn't documented as part of pprint's contract, however. Yes

  1   2   3   4   5   >