Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-23 Thread Chris Withers
Jim Fulton wrote: If Python had and used a packaging system, like eggs, this wouldn't be necessary. Someday. *grinz* The irony that python is so successfuly _because_ of it's batteries included nature isn't lost on me ;-) Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-23 Thread Jim Fulton
Chris Withers wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: If Python had and used a packaging system, like eggs, this wouldn't be necessary. Someday. *grinz* The irony that python is so successfuly _because_ of it's batteries included nature isn't lost on me ;-) I would argue that it is successful

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-20 Thread Jim Fulton
Chris Withers wrote: ... On a side note, I see python now includes doctest.py, why are we still maintaining our own copy in zope.testing? doctest has been in Python for a long time, far longer than we've been using it. Now that we use it aggressively and are aggressively contributing to it,

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-20 Thread Dieter Maurer
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2006-1-19 19:37 +0100: ... I'm talking about a Zope 2 release including (most of) what's in a Zope 3 release, so that Five developers can work on exposing *that* in Zope 2 too (which can then be part of the next Zope 2 release as we integrate the newer Five in it). I

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Benji York
Stephan Richter wrote: Let's say zope.testbrowser is an egg and I discover a bug in zope.textbrowser while doing some other Zope 3 development, I have to check out zope.testbrowser, fix the bug, check it in, download the new egg and hope it fixed my Zope 3 problem. I'm an egg neophyte, but I

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Jim Fulton
Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:09, Jim Fulton wrote: You know my position concerning the repository and the release; I'd prefer them to be kept as similar as possible to simplify the release process. I hope we can go in that direction. It also makes things more

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 18 January 2006 11:27, Martijn Faassen wrote: How do you assemble releases 'from releases'? I'm not sure I understand that. You mean make a Zope 2 release using a Zope 3 release? I'll note that SchoolTool greatly benefits from the

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: ... How do you assemble releases 'from releases'? I'm not sure I understand that. You mean make a Zope 2 release using a Zope 3 release? No, I mean using eggs. Zope should be broken into separate projects with their own eggs. A Zope release might

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Martijn Faassen
Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:09, Jim Fulton wrote: You know my position concerning the repository and the release; I'd prefer them to be kept as similar as possible to simplify the release process. I hope we can go in that direction. It also makes things more

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Stephan Richter
On Thursday 19 January 2006 07:00, Jim Fulton wrote: I have seen you take a similar approach to zope.testing and I found that painful just by watching the checkins. I don't understand what you mean.  Having a separate zope.testing project has been extremely useful.  For example, in our

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Stephan Richter
On Thursday 19 January 2006 07:00, Jim Fulton wrote:   I feel like an old record, but please let's keep the development process as simple as possible. I rather make some concessions to the packaging and dependency system than spending more time developing. Perhaps our goals are

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Stephan Richter
On Thursday 19 January 2006 07:46, Martijn Faassen wrote: Oh, this will make development so much more tedious. Let's say zope.testbrowser is an egg and I discover a bug in zope.textbrowser while doing some other Zope 3 development, I have to check out zope.testbrowser, fix the bug, check

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Martijn Faassen
Stephan Richter wrote: [svn reflecting egg dependency structure] That would work for me. If it resolves the risk and is still pretty automated, SVN checkout or even calling make, then it is fine by me. The others have also pointed out the egg development mode. Right, I didn't know of that,

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: ... Sure, I support dependencies and separating out Zope into sub projects, I'm just listing an additional use case: the repository state should be similar to release state, to avoid confusion for developers as well as people who want to become developers. I.e. a

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: ... A risk here is that if I find a bug in package X, I can't easily track it into package Y and fix it there, as package Y is an egg. The current system doesn't have this problem. There are two issues here: 1. Debugging. Can debugging tools show you code in eggs? They

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: ... What if we can create in SVN the equivalent of what would be an egg + its dependencies for checkout, using externals? I know Jim said he doesn't want to use externals, but I'm thinking in that direction. You'd have one SVN directory for each egg, which then contains

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Jim Fulton
Stephan Richter wrote: On Thursday 19 January 2006 07:00, Jim Fulton wrote: I feel like an old record, but please let's keep the development process as simple as possible. I rather make some concessions to the packaging and dependency system than spending more time developing. Perhaps

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Tim Peters
... [Stephan Ricther] I have seen you take a similar approach to zope.testing and I found that painful just by watching the checkins. [Jim Fulton] I don't understand what you mean. Having a separate zope.testing project has been extremely useful. For example, in our comercial apps, we

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: ... What if we can create in SVN the equivalent of what would be an egg + its dependencies for checkout, using externals? I know Jim said he doesn't want to use externals, but I'm thinking in that direction. You'd have one SVN directory for each egg,

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: Yes, but Zope 2 included *less* than Zope 3 in the most recent release, and I'd like *all* packages that are in a Zope 3 release to be available in a Zope 2 release. I.e. Five doesn't want packages that aren't in a Zope 3 release, but not less

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Martijn Faassen
Jim Fulton wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: Another use case, probably mostly in the context of Five, it's nice to have an inclusive release of Zope 3 in Zope 2. The goal of reducing the amount of code included in Zope 2 sounds nice in theory, but it stops Five developers from exposing Zope 3

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Michael Dunstan
On 1/20/06, Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In all, zope.testing is a poster child for the value of package development outside of a Zope tree. I've been very happy using zope.testing with several non zope projects. Including how easy it is to follow and distribute that package as needed

Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-19 Thread Chris Withers
Jim Fulton wrote: I think we should investigate eggs. Do I know they will work? No. I haven't done much with them yet. Do you know they won't? Obviously not. I suggest we reserve jusdgement until we have had an opportunity for some prototyping. Based on what I've seen so far, I'm very

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:36:35AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | And then there are the Windows releases. Making Zope 2 windows releases | is very painful and there don't seem to be many people willing to help. | We've avoided the pain for Zope 3 by being less ambitious. We let distutils | do most

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Lennart Regebro
On 1/18/06, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: These were some of my reactions to this first attempt at time-based releases. What do other folks think? I think early January is an understandable delay, considering that midwinter celebrations came in the way. Great work everyone! -- Lennart

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Jim Fulton
Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:36:35AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | And then there are the Windows releases. Making Zope 2 windows releases | is very painful and there don't seem to be many people willing to help. | We've avoided the pain for Zope 3 by being less ambitious. We

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:27:25AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | The installers do not require much Windows expertise. In fact, they | require a lot of 'makefile' expertise right now, and some Inno Setup | expertise, not much else. | | Sorry, Inno Setup is a windows installation builder. I consider

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Jim Fulton
Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:27:25AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | The installers do not require much Windows expertise. In fact, they | require a lot of 'makefile' expertise right now, and some Inno Setup | expertise, not much else. | | Sorry, Inno Setup is a windows

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Christian Theune
Hi, On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 13:40 -0200, Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:27:25AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | The installers do not require much Windows expertise. In fact, they | require a lot of 'makefile' expertise right now, and some Inno Setup | expertise, not much else. |

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:45:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | People up to now have come up with systems like this that they thought were | automated enough. That's why we don't have a 2.9 release for windows. What about we turn that around. How would you describe a 'automated enough' build

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Jim Fulton
Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:45:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | People up to now have come up with systems like this that they thought were | automated enough. That's why we don't have a 2.9 release for windows. What about we turn that around. How would you describe a

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Martijn Faassen
Hey, First, I'd like to thank you and everyone involved in the Zope 2 and Zope 3 releases for making this time-based release in what I consider to be a smashing success. Thanks for all the hard work! Things were late a bit, some things are imperfect, but we in the community are already feeling

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:24:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | Sidnei da Silva wrote: | On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:45:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | | People up to now have come up with systems like this that they thought | were | | automated enough. That's why we don't have a 2.9 release for

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Jim Fulton
Sidnei da Silva wrote: ... | As I said before, the fact that we don't have a windows release | is proof that the process isn't automated enough. That's not a proof that the process is not automated enough. The transition from python2.3 to 2.4 *is* non-trivial because python changed from

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Sidnei da Silva
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:46:33AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | Sidnei da Silva wrote: | ... | | As I said before, the fact that we don't have a windows release | | is proof that the process isn't automated enough. | | That's not a proof that the process is not automated enough. The | transition

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Jim Fulton
Sidnei da Silva wrote: On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:46:33AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote: | Sidnei da Silva wrote: | ... | | As I said before, the fact that we don't have a windows release | | is proof that the process isn't automated enough. | | That's not a proof that the process is not automated

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 11:27, Martijn Faassen wrote: How do you assemble releases 'from releases'? I'm not sure I understand that. You mean make a Zope 2 release using a Zope 3 release? I'll note that SchoolTool greatly benefits from the current release building. We simply include all

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Tim Peters
We should distinguish between authoring the Windows build-the-installer code, and running that code. Making a Zope 2 Windows release consists of _running_ the build-the-installer code, and is easy. It's actually easier than building a Zope 3 Windows release: once the Python tarball, Zope 2

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Jim Fulton
Martijn Faassen wrote: ... How do you assemble releases 'from releases'? I'm not sure I understand that. You mean make a Zope 2 release using a Zope 3 release? No, I mean using eggs. Zope should be broken into separate projects with their own eggs. A Zope release might just be an egg with

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Jim Fulton
Stephan Richter wrote: On Wednesday 18 January 2006 11:27, Martijn Faassen wrote: How do you assemble releases 'from releases'? I'm not sure I understand that. You mean make a Zope 2 release using a Zope 3 release? I'll note that SchoolTool greatly benefits from the current release

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Fred Drake
On 1/18/06, Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If eggs work out, as I hope they will, I'd like to stop work on zpkg and just use eggs. +42 -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr.fdrake at gmail.com There is no wealth but life. --John Ruskin ___ Zope-Dev

[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

2006-01-18 Thread Stephan Richter
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:09, Jim Fulton wrote: You know my position concerning the repository and the release; I'd prefer them to be kept as similar as possible to simplify the release process. I hope we can go in that direction. It also makes things more predictable to developers.