Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope without Zope
On 17. Nov 2007, at 02:15, Martin Aspeli wrote: I understand the historical reasons behind these dependencies, but I genuinely think we should pick a few libraries that are useful to the outside world (zope.interface, zope.component, zope.configuration, zope.annotation, zope.event come to mind) and work to make these have clean dependencies. +1 and zope.schema. Stefan -- Anything that happens, happens. --Douglas Adams ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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 without Zope
On Nov 16, 2007, at 8:15 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote: ... In any case, I definitely see a case for both. I can't see a good reason why we can't have support for simple XML-based component registration without having to depend on the ZODB and tons of other Zope eggs. You're right. We can. Someone will have to write that. I suspect that starting from the current zcml support, all that's necessary is to strip out permission support. I understand the historical reasons behind these dependencies, but I genuinely think we should pick a few libraries that are useful to the outside world (zope.interface, zope.component, zope.configuration, zope.annotation, zope.event come to mind) and work to make these have clean dependencies. Most or all of the ones you mention already do. zope.component's dependencies are clean as long as you don't try to use the zcml support. zope.annotation is the only one I'm not sure about but I bet it's dependencies are modest. Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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 without Zope
Jim Fulton wrote: I understand the historical reasons behind these dependencies, but I genuinely think we should pick a few libraries that are useful to the outside world (zope.interface, zope.component, zope.configuration, zope.annotation, zope.event come to mind) and work to make these have clean dependencies. Most or all of the ones you mention already do. zope.component's dependencies are clean as long as you don't try to use the zcml support. zope.annotation is the only one I'm not sure about but I bet it's dependencies are modest. zope.component, zope.interface and zope.schema worked well for me. zope.annotation does not work well at all - it's sat here doing zope.app.appsetup as I type this; zope.app.component, zope.app.authentication, zope.app.debug, zope.app.dependable, zope.publisher... I won't go on. I think zope.location which includes zope.security is the culprit. In general, I guess if we have zope.* packages depending on zope.app.* packages, something is wrong. ;) Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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 without Zope
Stephan Richter wrote: On Friday 16 November 2007, Jim Fulton wrote: Something is broken here and it needs to be fixed. Well, the easiest solution would be to remove those misbehaving distributions from the cheeseshop. However, I think we kid ourselves if we think that the cheeseshop will always provide a stable set by default. This would be like saying that all packages from all versions of one Linux distribution are in one repository and nothing will break. It'd work if setuptools supported a 'give me a version that works' feature. You'd just have to specify the working dependencies along with the loose dependencies in setup.py. You'd still have potential problems if you use multiple packages that share a dependency, and the working version they suggest conflicts. It's then up to the end user to break the conflict. Theoretically, as long as you'd follow the loose dependencies and we maintain those well, things would still work. I can even think of a trivial example. Let's say package A works only with Python 2.x and package B works only with Python 3.0a. The supported Python versions are not part of the meta-data of a package. As a naive user, I want to use both, but can't. Heh, Python 3 will cause way more problems than this. We should avoid releasing Python 3 versions for our packages for that reason. If you release them, I'd suggest picking a different name for the egg altogether - that's what is typically done in Linux distributions if there are multiple incompatible versions of a library (GTK 1 and 2, for instance). Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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 without Zope
Hi Chris, Then I tried to easy_install zope.security, but this pulled in most of Zope, including the ZODB, ZConfig and zdaemon. That's a real shame - no CA (at least not with ZCML) without having pretty much all of Zope there. :( Yup. Inappropriate dependency chain when you use the cheeseshop. See http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2007-November/030276.html I was trying to pass -i KGS url to easy_install to use the KGS. Is that not right? Actually, I never got to try it further, because this then died with: Installed /Users/optilude/Development/Pylons/zylons/lib/python2.4/ site-packages/ZConfig-2.5-py2.4.egg error: Installed distribution zope.traversing 3.4.0 conflicts with requirement zope.traversing=3.5.0a1.dev-r78730 If you're trying to installed these eggs using easy_install against the Cheeseshop, it won't work because the information in the setup.py of some eggs isn't the whole story about required versions of dependencies. Instead, some of version pinning information is stored in buildout.cfg (in a [versions] section) within these eggs. If you use buildout to install them, or use the KGS as the index URL to easy_install it will probably work. See http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2007-November/030279.html (and actually the rest of that thread) for the whole story. I tried that, so either I'm doing something wrong or it doesn't work. Can someone try to easy_install zope.security against the KGS? In the short term, you should be able to do either of the following: - use buildout to install the eggs - use easy_install --index-url=http://download.zope.org/zope3.4 distribution As far as I know, that's what I did. :-/ The first one will work due to version-pinning statements in the buildout.cfg of dependent eggs. The second one works because it doesn't find the bad distribution of zope.app.publisher that exists on the Cheeseshop that causes the later conflict. You'll still get a bunch of eggs you don't need, but at least they'll get installed. :-/ Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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 without Zope
Lennart Regebro wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 11:41 AM, Lennart Regebro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 3:38 AM, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Help appreciated! Well, I suggest you forget about ZCML and try to use the CA directly from Python. The Pylons people would probably appreciate the lack of XML anyway. :) i'd also recommend this. i've actually been working on a pylons app that uses zope.component, it works like a dream. zope.component brings in a total of 6 eggs, IIRC. if you really want zcml-like separation of config and code, then put your python configuration declarations in a separate module. this not only Just Works(tm), but i think lennart's point about not scaring people away w/ an XML-based config language is a huge one. -r ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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 without Zope
Rob Miller wrote: Lennart Regebro wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 11:41 AM, Lennart Regebro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 16, 2007 3:38 AM, Martin Aspeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Help appreciated! Well, I suggest you forget about ZCML and try to use the CA directly from Python. The Pylons people would probably appreciate the lack of XML anyway. :) i'd also recommend this. i've actually been working on a pylons app that uses zope.component, it works like a dream. zope.component brings in a total of 6 eggs, IIRC. if you really want zcml-like separation of config and code, then put your python configuration declarations in a separate module. this not only Just Works(tm), but i think lennart's point about not scaring people away w/ an XML-based config language is a huge one. Depends on the people. At work, we're using Spring (which, as far as Java goes, is great). The notion of having XML-based configuration gives a lot of wins in certain types of applications - mostly around being able to override deployment type settings in a staging or developer environment. In any case, I definitely see a case for both. I can't see a good reason why we can't have support for simple XML-based component registration without having to depend on the ZODB and tons of other Zope eggs. I understand the historical reasons behind these dependencies, but I genuinely think we should pick a few libraries that are useful to the outside world (zope.interface, zope.component, zope.configuration, zope.annotation, zope.event come to mind) and work to make these have clean dependencies. We don't have to do it all at once, just try to identify where there is a need (to me - using basic CA functions, including externalised configuration). We should also market this, just like Lennart did with his recent blog post (thanks Lennart!) Otherwise, they are not usable outside Zope-the-megaframework, in which case, why are we doing all this eggification and attempting to share the love? :) Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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] The Zope Software Certification Program and Common Repository Proposal
On Monday 20 February 2006 20:09, Andrew Milton wrote: So in order to even get your Open Source package LISTED, you have to sign over the rights of your code to Zope Corp (currently, Zope Foundation later), and then check it into the svn respository. Is this is correct? NO! ABSOLUTELY NOT! The ZSCP is totally disconnected from the Common Repository. Note that the ZSCP does not talk about any repositories or technical implementation. It only talks about the certification goals, requirements and data. So you're proposing that the Zope Foundation will not even mention other Open Source code that isn't actually owned and controlled by the Zope Foundation? Huh? Where did you get this idea from? Did you actually read the proposal? Having a standard Zope package format would be far far more useful to the users at large, along with the associated tools (so developers can create compliant zope packages, and users can install packages actually using Zope). Packaging tools can then enforce certain restrictions automatically and create a manifest. We cannot require something that we do not have. Thus I did not address packaging or strong dependency meta-data in the proposal. I think once we investigated eggs and have some initial implementation, the proposal will be updated in light of this. If you had that, then that would certainly ease adding 'stuff' to the 'certified' repository, getting to LISTED level would be automatic. Becoming listed will be a nearly automated process. Also receiving level 1 and 2 will be quick decisions. This is clearly stated in section 2.8. I have added a questions to the QA section clearly stating that the ZSCP does not require packages in the Common Repository. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 05:24:08PM +0200, Andreas Jung wrote: Heads up for the 2.8.0 final release. My plans are to make the final release on Saturday morning. So any further changes should be done by tomorrow at the latest. Cheers, -aj Mind if I check in text-only changes to the 2_8 branch? I'm playing with a checkout of the Zope-2_8-branch right now, and while I was looking at doc/*txt to see what if anything is said about migrating to 2.8, I noticed some really trivial typos which I'd gladly check in (and merge to the trunk too). 5710 unit tests... holy cow. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
On 6/10/05, Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mind if I check in text-only changes to the 2_8 branch? It's still Friday for Andreas, so this is a good time! -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr.fdrake at gmail.com Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:27:15PM +0200, Andreas Jung wrote: --On 10. Juni 2005 12:39:50 -0400 Fred Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/10/05, Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mind if I check in text-only changes to the 2_8 branch? It's still Friday for Andreas, so this is a good time! yeah...countdown is running :-) -aj Done. Like I said, just trivial docs typos. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:21:32PM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: Done. Like I said, just trivial docs typos. While I'm at it, anybody object to the attached patch to doc/FAQ.txt ? -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com Index: FAQ.txt === --- FAQ.txt (revision 30745) +++ FAQ.txt (working copy) @@ -194,7 +194,35 @@ (yay) it's var/z2.pid, for pcgi (not so yay), it's var/pcgi.pid. -4. After moving my old Data.fs to Zope 2.8 I get an + Upgrading from Earlier Versions of Zope + +1. How can I upgrade to Zope 2.8? + + The usual procedure when installing a new version of Zope is: + + - Create a new instance (see doc/INSTALL.txt). + + - Copy the var/Data.fs file from your old instance into your + new instance's var/ directory. (It is best to do this while + the old instance is not running; alternatively, you can + use repozo.py as described at + http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/FileStorageBackup + to make a live backup, then create a new Data.fs from that + backup in your new instance.) + + Keep your old Data.fs in the old instance as a backup. + + - Copy the Products and Extensions directories from your old + instance into the new instance. + + - Update etc/zope.conf with any changes you made in your + old instance. (Likewise for zeo.conf if you are using zeo.) + + - Start the new instance. (Be sure the old instance is not running.) + + - Update any ZCatalogs as described below. + +2. After moving my old Data.fs to Zope 2.8 I get an AttributeError, _length when trying to use the ZCatalog? In Zope 2.8 we cleaned up the index implementations and therefore @@ -224,6 +252,25 @@ converted and reindexed +3. CMF doesn't work! + +Check that you have a recent stable version of CMF. +You need at least CMF-1.4.8. CMF is available at +http://www.zope.org/Products/CMF/ + + +4. Plone doesn't work! + +As of the release of Zope 2.8.0, Plone does not support +Zope 2.8 yet. Check http://www.plone.org for updates. + + +5. I'm using Python 2.4 and I'm having a problem... + + Zope 2.8 has not been tested with Python 2.4. + Please use Python 2.3. + + General ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 03:07:51PM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:21:32PM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: Done. Like I said, just trivial docs typos. While I'm at it, anybody object to the attached patch to doc/FAQ.txt ? (snip) Holy crap, FAQ.txt is rally crufty. It's loaded with pcgi information and other useless crap. Gimme a minute to come up with a better patch. I should make a branch for this. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
[Paul Winkler] Holy crap, FAQ.txt is rally crufty. It's loaded with pcgi information and other useless crap. Gimme a minute to come up with a better patch. I should make a branch for this. I vote you check in changes instead, until you run out of time. Every improvement will lessen confusion for countless multitudes until the end of time. Perfection is overrated 0.9 wink. Thanks for doing it, BTW! Some things get so out of date that paralysis is the natural reaction -- but a chain of small improvements can turn that around. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:21:32PM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: Done. Like I said, just trivial docs typos. Yeah, but improvements are improvements! On 6/10/05, Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I'm at it, anybody object to the attached patch to doc/FAQ.txt ? I don't see a need to include the disclaimer about Python 2.4; I test on 2.4, and use Zope 3 trunk with 2.4.1 all the time. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr.fdrake at gmail.com Zope Corporation ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 03:40:41PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote: [Paul Winkler] Holy crap, FAQ.txt is rally crufty. It's loaded with pcgi information and other useless crap. Gimme a minute to come up with a better patch. I should make a branch for this. I vote you check in changes instead, until you run out of time. OK, done on 2_8-branch and merged to trunk. Every improvement will lessen confusion for countless multitudes until the end of time. Perfection is overrated 0.9 wink. Yeah, e.g. even if we never get our butts in gear to release it, Chris's 2.7 version of the Zope Book is still vastly better than the 2.6 version (which was vastly better than 2.5, etc.) Thanks for doing it, BTW! Some things get so out of date that paralysis is the natural reaction -- but a chain of small improvements can turn that around. Agreed. If I had nothing else to do I would poke around in that directory some more. I think WEBSERVERS.txt could use some attention, and probably others too. Sadly there's other things in doc/ that could use the attention, and I have to get back to Real Work now. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 04:04:48PM -0400, Fred Drake wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:21:32PM -0400, Paul Winkler wrote: Done. Like I said, just trivial docs typos. Yeah, but improvements are improvements! On 6/10/05, Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I'm at it, anybody object to the attached patch to doc/FAQ.txt ? I don't see a need to include the disclaimer about Python 2.4; I test on 2.4, and use Zope 3 trunk with 2.4.1 all the time. Maybe you do, but it really is a FAQ, and that's the consensus response from the chorus every time it comes up on the main zope list, so I feel justified :-) -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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-Coders] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
[Fred Drake] I don't see a need to include the disclaimer about Python 2.4; I test on 2.4, and use Zope 3 trunk with 2.4.1 all the time. [Paul Winkler] Maybe you do, but it really is a FAQ, and that's the consensus response from the chorus every time it comes up on the main zope list, so I feel justified :-) It's the right answer, too. No security audit has been done against Python 2.4 for Zope use yet, and Zope Corp won't officially bless 2.4 for use with Zope until that's been done. Note that the story is different for ZODB: Python 2.4+ is officially blessed for standalone ZODB use. This is one advantage of keeping DTML out of the storage layer wink. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org 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 and zope
+1 this is a problem. The question is whether curing it is *more* of a problem. -Casey On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 09:00:26 -0400 Jim Fulton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Zope 2 has a package named Zope. Zope 3 has a package named zope. Starting with Zope 2.8, parts of Zope 3 will be included in Zope 2. As things stand, this will require having both Zope and zope packages. Python can handle this fine, however, it will require putting the packages in separate directories (for Windows). A typical Zope installation will probably add at least two directories to the Python path, for: - The Zope software - Instance (site) specific packages So adding two directories, rather than one for the Zope software isn't a big deal. Of course, having two packages with names differing only in case is a bit ugly. Do we want to consider renaming one or both of these packages to avoid the conflict? I should have been clearer. The first question is: Is it a problem to have two packages with names differing only in case? I haven't gotten as many responses on this as I expected. I'll try to summarize so far: - Chris feels strongly that this is a problem - I've been swayed by Chris' response from neutral to thinking that this is a problem. - Tres seems not to think this is a problem, but I'm not sure. - Fred doesn't seem to think this is a problem. - I can't tell from Robert's and Stephans responses whether they think this is a problem or not. Perhaps we can get more input on whether there's a problem. A response with a positive sign (e.g. +1, +0, +2, ...) indicates agreement that this is a probelm. :) Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ 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 and zope
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 therefore, since they would be in different directories. I haven't gotten as many responses on this as I expected. I'll try to summarize so far: - Chris feels strongly that this is a problem - I've been swayed by Chris' response from neutral to thinking that this is a problem. - Tres seems not to think this is a problem, but I'm not sure. - Fred doesn't seem to think this is a problem. - I can't tell from Robert's and Stephans responses whether they think this is a problem or not. Perhaps we can get more input on whether there's a problem. A response with a positive sign (e.g. +1, +0, +2, ...) indicates agreement that this is a probelm. :) -2 The reason why I don't see a big problem from the aesthetic point of view is that the 'Zope' package isn't used much in Zope2 anyway. Most stuff is in top-level packages such as OFS, App, Acquisition, ZPublisher, ZServer etc. I have Zope2 products that don't even import from 'Zope'. So, who would care? Renaming it would just be a hassle and asking for trouble (esp. regarding incompatabilies). I can see why it might be embarrassing having to document two package names that only differ by case. For newbies, it might even be confusing (though again, who ever gets in touch with lib/python/Zope?). But so is Zope2's codebase already. Most code is icky and naming conventions simply don't exist. Philipp ___ 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 and zope
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: 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 therefore, since they would be in different directories. As I mentioned in my note, Python allows us to have two packages whos names differ only by case. I also noted that this requires adding an additional directory to the path. This isn't a big deal. I think it's an annoyance. I haven't gotten as many responses on this as I expected. I'll try to summarize so far: - Chris feels strongly that this is a problem - I've been swayed by Chris' response from neutral to thinking that this is a problem. - Tres seems not to think this is a problem, but I'm not sure. - Fred doesn't seem to think this is a problem. - I can't tell from Robert's and Stephans responses whether they think this is a problem or not. Perhaps we can get more input on whether there's a problem. A response with a positive sign (e.g. +1, +0, +2, ...) indicates agreement that this is a probelm. :) -2 Wow. That's a strong opinion that there's no problem :) especially since: ... I can see why it might be embarrassing having to document two package names that only differ by case. For newbies, it might even be confusing This sounds like an argument for there being a problem. I guess your large negative vote is a vote against the alternatives... fair enough. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ 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 and zope
Jim Fulton wrote: Chris McDonough wrote: I think the breakage, although literally incalculable (as is every change to Zope 2, given that it has no canonical API), would be manageable given enough lead time. In fact, if we did change the module name, we could just leave a bruce package in place that, when imported, raised a ObsoleteError with a descriptive message. But I think that this is a big problem. Backward compatibility for Z2 *is* important. It's too bad that lots of test files have to import Zope. Sigh. Why is that a *big* problem? - It's not nice to break tests, but that doesn't necessarily mean the products are broken. - AFAICT many products need some polishing and a new release for Zope 2.8 anyway. Cheers, Yuppie ___ 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 and zope
Chris McDonough wrote: +1 It looks like in the Zope 2 trunk, there are only a very few places that rely on import Zope or from Zope import. It looks like it would be possible to change the name of the Zope package in Zope 2 to zope2 or something without a tremendous amount of work. And as long as a module alias was created to alias that to Zope, 3rd party products would continue to work. This strategy would only work if we didn't plan on supporting systems where PYTHONCASEOK (see python -h) was set to be case-ignoring (are there any?). One potentially nasty problem is that the Zope 2 bootstrap code lives inside the Zope package within Zope.Setup, and some 3rd-party utilities (like the Plone Controller and many 3rd party tests that don't use the testrunner/test.py framework) rely on being able to import Zope. Renaming the package pushes the responsibility for knowing about the name change out to those utilities (because there's really just nowhere to insert a module alias shim before they attempt to import Zope). Considering the pain that I know would be involved with doing a zope - zope3 rename, however, this might be an acceptable breakage (except of course to those whose code it breaks, so they should speak up). On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 10:40, Jim Fulton wrote: snip Of course, having two packages with names differing only in case is a bit ugly. Do we want to consider renaming one or both of these packages to avoid the conflict? -1 to renaming 'Zope'; the amount of third-party code which we would break is incalculable. -0 to renaming 'zope' to 'z3', or something; at least third party code for Zope3 was built in the test-driven culture, and has at least some chance of migrating cleanly with confidence. Tres. -- === Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zope Corporation Zope Dealers http://www.zope.com ___ 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] ANNOUNCE: Zope 2.6.3 Release and Security Update
Brian -- Does this mean that Zope 2.6.3 is compatible with Python 2.3.3? I would be nice to retire 2.1.3. -dra On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Brian Lloyd wrote: Zope 2.6.3 Release and Security Update Zope 2.6.3 contains a number of security related fixes for issues resolved during a comprehensive security audit conducted in Q4 2003. You may download Zope 2.6.3 from Zope.org: http://www.zope.org/Products/Zope/2.6.3/ [...] ___ 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] ANNOUNCE: Zope 2.6.3 Release and Security Update
On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 20:31, Dennis Allison wrote: Does this mean that Zope 2.6.3 is compatible with Python 2.3.3? I would be nice to retire 2.1.3. I'm not aware of any Zope Corp internal projects still using Python 2.1.3. I'm not aware of any serious incompatibilities. I suppose the only risk would be that fixing problems in Zope 2.6 specific to a Python version would have low priority because Zope 2.7 is on the horizon. Jeremy (not speaking for ZC) ___ 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-Coders] Zope anonymous CVS temporarily offline
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Martijn Pieters wrote: Due to the CVS vulnerabilities disclosed today, we have temporarily shut down anonymous CVS access to cvs.zope.org through pserver. We'll reenable this when we have upgraded CVS on the server. People with write access through SSH and the web interface at http://cvs.zope.org are still available. Adam has upgraded the CVS installation and put pserver back online, so public CVS operations should be back to normal... -- Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-Annce] Zope 2.4.4 Available
Error Report: On Redhat-Skipjack 7.2.93: # tar -xvzf Zope-2.4.4-linux2-x86.tgz # cd Zope-2.4.4-linux2-x86 # bin/python bin/python: relocation error: bin/python: undefined symbol: atexit ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-Coders] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
- Original Message - From: Brian Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:00 Subject: [Zope-Coders] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors! http://dev.zope.org/Resources/zope_260_plan.html I wholeheartedly agree that 2.6 needs to be significantly a community effort. While I know that many people are engaged in the Zope 3 effort, we also need to get some people engaged on defining and producing 2.6 in the interim. There is not much on the plan right now, so the possibilities are relatively wide open :) Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6. I suggest to add support to retrieve the document source for dedicated WebDAV clients (identified by their useragent string) on the standard HTTP port. Some work on this issue has been done in the past and could be added for 2.6. Andreas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-Coders] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Thursday 28 February 2002 3:00 pm, Brian Lloyd wrote: Paul sent a note to zope-coders some time back fishing for some feedback regarding planning for a Zope 2.6 (excepted): I propose that planning for a 2.6 focus on the following thoughts: I wholeheartedly agree that 2.6 needs to be significantly a community effort. The 2.6 timeframe should allow me to find some time to integrate my Unicode support (in ZPublisher, ZServer, and DTML), if there is agreement that this is the right thing to do. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-Coders] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Toby Dickenson wrote: The 2.6 timeframe should allow me to find some time to integrate my Unicode support (in ZPublisher, ZServer, and DTML), if there is agreement that this is the right thing to do. I'd +1 that in a big way :-) Especially combined with landing all Andreas' cool ZCatalog unicode work... cheers, Chris ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-Coders] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
- Original Message - From: Brian Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:00 Subject: [Zope-Coders] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors! I wholeheartedly agree that 2.6 needs to be significantly a community effort. While I know that many people are engaged in the Zope 3 effort, we also need to get some people engaged on defining and producing 2.6 in the interim. There is not much on the plan right now, so the possibilities are relatively wide open :) Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6. My TextIndexNG could be a powerful contribution to Zope 2.6 ;-) Andreas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope-Coders] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
If I had to make a wild guess, I would say 2.6 might land in the May-June timeframe. I would anticipate a drive for finalization in May, with the release cycle in June. That's not official, just a good guess based on our historical release patterns. On Friday, March 1, 2002, at 06:56 AM, Chris Withers wrote: Toby Dickenson wrote: The 2.6 timeframe should allow me to find some time to integrate my Unicode support (in ZPublisher, ZServer, and DTML), if there is agreement that this is the right thing to do. I'd +1 that in a big way :-) Especially combined with landing all Andreas' cool ZCatalog unicode work... cheers, Chris ___ Zope-Coders mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-coders ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] ANNOUNCE: Zope 2.4.0 alpha 1 released
- New restricted execution architecture A note about this for those who have run afoul of restrictions on builtins such as 'list', 'map', and 'range' in Scripts and DTML Python expressions: In the new architecture, there are (by default) no attempts to protect the system against excessive CPU or memory utilization. Unless you explicitly turn on such limits (not implemented yet), anyone who has permission to write DTML or Scripts in your Zope can accidentally or deliberately consume all available resources with infinite loops or huge data structures. Realistically, they could before, they just had to be slightly more creative. Cheers, Evan @ digicool ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] ZDESIGN IDEAS = How to improve 'manage' ?
* Joachim Werner sez:
Ok, let me try to understand this one. I am a bit dumb, sorry...
- You can work with full SSL-encryption, maybe even client certificates.
This is much more secure than TELNET or FTP. (Unfortunately, SSH/SCP,
while being the "better TELNET/FTP" is not always an option, and it
always opens up more than necessary)
what exactly does SSH open uo 'more than necessary'. Sufficient clue on
admin's side provided?
- People won't hack together their own solutions for the problem (with
LocalFS installed and me having the rights to add LocalFS instances, it
would take me not very long to "infiltrate" any Zope server. Just add the
"Extensions" folder via LocalFS and upload all you need as External
Methods ...)
That requires a few things, if I am not mistaken...
a) ZServer runs as anything but nobody/nogroup and is not
jail(8)ed/chrooted. If that is the case, well, I'd personally shoot
the admin responsible for that if something comes up.
b) ${ZOPEROOT}/Extensions allows nobody to write into it - shoot admin.
http://www.post1.com/home/ngps is a good way to start securing Zope, the
problem of transmitting passwords in the clear is a big one, but has
been solved at my domains by deploying SecurID-tokens, which might not
be the ultiamte solution (lots of stuff I wanted to hide is still
transmitted in the clear) but is a good start.
jonas
--
Jonas Luster -- http://smurftarget.net (while netwarriors.org is down) --
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] ANNOUNCE: Zope 2.3.0 alpha 1 released...
Found a bug, I think... when I try to add a property to a PropertyManager (but not a PropertySheet?) I get: Error Type: ImportError Error Value: cannot import name checkValidId Traceback (innermost last): File /opt/Zope-2.3.0a1-src/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py, line 222, in publish_module File /opt/Zope-2.3.0a1-src/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py, line 187, in publish File /opt/Zope-2.3.0a1-src/lib/python/Zope/__init__.py, line 221, in zpublisher_exception_hook (Object: Traversable) File /opt/Zope-2.3.0a1-src/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py, line 171, in publish File /opt/Zope-2.3.0a1-src/lib/python/ZPublisher/mapply.py, line 160, in mapply (Object: manage_addProperty) File /opt/Zope-2.3.0a1-src/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py, line 112, in call_object (Object: manage_addProperty) File /opt/Zope-2.3.0a1-src/lib/python/OFS/PropertyManager.py, line 318, in manage_addProperty (Object: Traversable) File /opt/Zope-2.3.0a1-src/lib/python/OFS/PropertyManager.py, line 247, in _setProperty (Object: Traversable) ImportError: (see above) []s, |alo + -- Hack and Roll ( http://www.hackandroll.org ) The biggest site for whatever-it-is-that-we-are. http://zope.gf.com.br/lalo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp key: http://zope.gf.com.br/lalo/pessoal/pgp Brazil of Darkness (RPG)--- http://zope.gf.com.br/BroDar ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
RE: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] ANNOUNCE: Zope 2.3.0 alpha 1 released...
Found a bug, I think... when I try to add a property to a PropertyManager (but not a PropertySheet?) I get: Error Type: ImportError Error Value: cannot import name checkValidId Thanks - the fix should be checked in shortly... Brian Lloyd[EMAIL PROTECTED] Software Engineer 540.371.6909 Digital Creations http://www.digicool.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Re: [Zope-dev] cookies ie5.5 win
I had a problem like this once, and worked out that it was because the system time was incorrect in IE somehow. The time that windows was displaying was correct, but that had been manually changed to take in to account day light savings which started early in Australia this year due to the olympics. But for some reason internallyIE was using the wrong time, so my cookies were expiring as soon as they were set! Netscape on windows didn't have the same problem...and obviously netscape on linux didn't have the problem. terry Chris Withers wrote: Sebastian Luehnsdorf wrote: i'm having a strange problem with cookie based user authentication with ms internet explorer 5.5 on windows. it seems that the browser (but only this version and only under windows!) seems to "forget" its cookies, which results in an immediate logout. does anybody have similar experiences or a even solution? I've had this problem occasionally with other versions of IE. I wonder whether you're setting the path on cookies correctly? That's all I can think of... Anyone else noticed this? cheers, Chris ___ Zope maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ) -- - Terry Kerr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Adroit Internet Solutions http://www.adroit.net/ 03 9563 4461 0414 708 124 ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Re: Zope 2.1.5/6/7 upgrading issues
Hi! My vote is here: On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, Brian Lloyd wrote: o retract the 2.1.7 release in favor of getting 2.2 beta 2 out on Monday, which doesn't have the cruft problem of the 2.1.x branch and contains all fixes to date (and which will fix SQLMethod problems and support the SiteAccess release that Evan is making today). I am not running any production servers (yet), so I better will start to experiment with new Zope, rather than patching old one. Other people esp. those who run prod. servers free to have different opinions :) Oleg.(All opinions are mine and not of my employer) Oleg Broytmann Foundation for Effective Policies [EMAIL PROTECTED] Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] Re: Zope 2.1.5/6/7 upgrading issues
Hi! My vote is here: On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, Brian Lloyd wrote: o retract the 2.1.7 release in favor of getting 2.2 beta 2 out on Monday, which doesn't have the cruft problem of the 2.1.x branch and contains all fixes to date (and which will fix SQLMethod problems and support the SiteAccess release that Evan is making today). I am not running any production servers (yet), so I better will start to experiment with new Zope, rather than patching old one. Other people esp. those who run prod. servers free to have different opinions :) For me it's not big problem too (yet:) and better way to trying to use new beta rather fighting with old patches and hacks. But.. maybe will be a general problem for contributed products wchich uses MailHost (such as EMarket, ETailer, maybe WordlPilot etc) bacause MailHost API (especially MailHost.add) method was changed in 2.2 branch (in current 2.1.7 too), due to use of standard smtplib module. And there is a big and serious problem (I think not only for me:). On my Win box Zope2.2b1 craches (GFP), dont allow add objects (eg. Folder), dont allow enter Control Panel if product incorect installed, etc.. 2.2b1 is very , very unstable for now. Of course I understand the reasons (a lot of very important changes). If I would help to avoid some problems I can test v2.2b2 extensively, especially on Win32 box (Win98, Win2000) and a little (for comparison of behaviour) on RH Linux. PS: appologize for my 'english' Adam Karpierz [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
