[Zope-dev] Zope 2.8: ZODB fix breaks undoable_transactions
Hi! http://svn.zope.org/?view=revrev=30334 changed the behavior of undoInfo() in a way that is not backwards compatible. See http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1822 for details. I can see 3 ways to resolve this: 1.) restoring the old behavior of undoInfo() in ZODB 2.) restoring the old behavior of undoable_transactions() 3.) propagating the change to all the code that depends on undoable_transactions() I don't know all the reasons why undoInfo() was changed, so I don't know if reverting the change is an option. If 1.) is no option, I would prefer solution 2.) over 3.) Any opinions? Cheers, Yuppie ___ 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] Zope 2.8: ZODB fix breaks undoable_transactions
[yuppie] http://svn.zope.org/?view=revrev=30334 changed the behavior of undoInfo() in a way that is not backwards compatible. That's true, or at least off-by-one different than recent ZODB 3.2s. Rev 30334 fixed two bugs in the implementation, so that the behavior matched what the documentation has always said undoInfo() did. I don't know when the implementation got out of synch with the docs, but however people want to resolve this I will not leave the implementation disagreeing with the docs. See http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1822 for details. I added details there. ___ 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] Zope 2.8 coming this weekend
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 pgptJAh1rk5y3.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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] Zope 2.8 on hold
Andreas Jung wrote: in agreement with Jim Fulton and Brian Lloyd we decided to put the Zope 2.8 release on hold for now. There are several open issues related to running Zope on Windows (building, startup problems). Since we need to have a stable source code release and a stable windows release in sync, the next beta 2 will appear as soon as the major issues are fixed. This is maybe a good point for advanced Windows programmer to help out *wink* will appear as soon as issuse are fixed sounds to me as a recipe for infinite delays... 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.8 on hold
--On Montag, 9. Mai 2005 14:59 Uhr +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: in agreement with Jim Fulton and Brian Lloyd we decided to put the Zope 2.8 release on hold for now. There are several open issues related to running Zope on Windows (building, startup problems). Since we need to have a stable source code release and a stable windows release in sync, the next beta 2 will appear as soon as the major issues are fixed. This is maybe a good point for advanced Windows programmer to help out *wink* will appear as soon as issuse are fixed sounds to me as a recipe for infinite delays... Show blockers - either in the source release or the Windows binary release - need to be resolved before the next release. We won't ship a release which has known major problems. -aj pgpavFbdyEuyp.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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] Zope 2.8 on hold
Hi, in agreement with Jim Fulton and Brian Lloyd we decided to put the Zope 2.8 release on hold for now. There are several open issues related to running Zope on Windows (building, startup problems). Since we need to have a stable source code release and a stable windows release in sync, the next beta 2 will appear as soon as the major issues are fixed. This is maybe a good point for advanced Windows programmer to help out *wink* Andreas pgpAckJoeklPm.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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] Zope 2.8, Five and Interfaces
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 stay at their status quo (status Zope 2.7, that is). 3. Add five:bridge / calls for every interface so that Five's interfaces are automatically kept up-to-date with the Zope 2.8 ones. The bridges would override the ones defined in the module, potentially updating with newer definitions. The only thing that we need to take care of is fallback for Zope 2.7 where the Zope 2 interfaces don't exist yet. So you would have the Zope 2.8 interfaces exist in the Five.interfaces module? If not, we do have a compatibility problem. 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] Zope 2.8, Five and Interfaces
Hi! I had a closer look at Zope 2.8's Five and I'm concerned about the fact that Five ships with redundant interface definitions: - redundant code is always a problem because it's hard to keep things in sync - the fact that Five is maintained in a different repository and should work with different Zope versions makes it almost impossible to change Zope interfaces in a consistent way So my questions are: 1.) Why are interfaces that are available as Zope 2 interfaces duplicated in Five/interfaces.py instead of bridged? 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 2.7 and old Five products? If people agree that this is problem, I'd volunteer to help resolving it. Cheers, Yuppie ___ 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] Zope 2.8, Five and Interfaces
yuppie wrote: I had a closer look at Zope 2.8's Five and I'm concerned about the fact that Five ships with redundant interface definitions: - redundant code is always a problem because it's hard to keep things in sync - the fact that Five is maintained in a different repository and should work with different Zope versions makes it almost impossible to change Zope interfaces in a consistent way So my questions are: 1.) Why are interfaces that are available as Zope 2 interfaces duplicated in Five/interfaces.py instead of bridged? Partially I suspect this reason is historical -- the Zope 2 interfaces were created by Philipp von Weitershausen before Tres implemented the bridging functionality. 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 2.7 and old Five products? If people agree that this is problem, I'd volunteer to help resolving it. It sounds like a reasonable idea, but it does introduce complications. This does mean we need a separate version of Five for merging into Zope 2.8. Another potential problem is that some Five-based code is also likely to stop working as the interface will change location (I'm not sure what bridge does in this respect; does it create a new location for the bridged interface?). If the interfaces change location due to bridging, this also means Five + 2.7 code would be incompatible with Zope 2.8 code that makes use of Five. I'm a bit worried about doing it now as it will take time and testing effort, then again, if we are to do it, it would be better to start moving things around before we release Zope 2.8.. 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.8, Five and Interfaces
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martijn Faassen wrote: yuppie wrote: I had a closer look at Zope 2.8's Five and I'm concerned about the fact that Five ships with redundant interface definitions: - redundant code is always a problem because it's hard to keep things in sync - the fact that Five is maintained in a different repository and should work with different Zope versions makes it almost impossible to change Zope interfaces in a consistent way So my questions are: 1.) Why are interfaces that are available as Zope 2 interfaces duplicated in Five/interfaces.py instead of bridged? Partially I suspect this reason is historical -- the Zope 2 interfaces were created by Philipp von Weitershausen before Tres implemented the bridging functionality. 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 2.7 and old Five products? Maybe we need to spell out what the fallback would look like more clearly. If people agree that this is problem, I'd volunteer to help resolving it. It sounds like a reasonable idea, but it does introduce complications. This does mean we need a separate version of Five for merging into Zope 2.8. Another potential problem is that some Five-based code is also likely to stop working as the interface will change location (I'm not sure what bridge does in this respect; does it create a new location for the bridged interface?). The bridging code fabricates a new Z3 interface and bashes it into whatever module the directive specifies, so we could keep the same dotted names as the current interfaces. If the interfaces change location due to bridging, this also means Five + 2.7 code would be incompatible with Zope 2.8 code that makes use of Five. I'm a bit worried about doing it now as it will take time and testing effort, then again, if we are to do it, it would be better to start moving things around before we release Zope 2.8.. +1. I have an intent (but no time so far) to make the equivalent change for CMFonFive, as well. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zope Corporation Zope Dealers http://www.zope.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCeMO+GqWXf00rNCgRAnqFAJ0TSKfcX7AnvVE7h4CGahn8CwDMdwCdHI2g OJ4vvoGtbvrLWRS6qBwAZ6A= =IHBw -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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] Zope 2.8, Five and Interfaces
Tres Seaver wrote: I had a closer look at Zope 2.8's Five and I'm concerned about the fact that Five ships with redundant interface definitions: - redundant code is always a problem because it's hard to keep things in sync - the fact that Five is maintained in a different repository and should work with different Zope versions makes it almost impossible to change Zope interfaces in a consistent way So my questions are: 1.) Why are interfaces that are available as Zope 2 interfaces duplicated in Five/interfaces.py instead of bridged? Partially I suspect this reason is historical -- the Zope 2 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 2.7 and old Five products? Maybe we need to spell out what the fallback would look like more clearly. If people agree that this is problem, I'd volunteer to help resolving it. It sounds like a reasonable idea, but it does introduce complications. This does mean we need a separate version of Five for merging into Zope 2.8. Another potential problem is that some Five-based code is also likely to stop working as the interface will change location (I'm not sure what bridge does in this respect; does it create a new location for the bridged interface?). The bridging code fabricates a new Z3 interface and bashes it into whatever module the directive specifies, so we could keep the same dotted names as the current interfaces. 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 stay at their status quo (status Zope 2.7, that is). 3. Add five:bridge / calls for every interface so that Five's interfaces are automatically kept up-to-date with the Zope 2.8 ones. The bridges would override the ones defined in the module, potentially updating with newer definitions. The only thing that we need to take care of is fallback for Zope 2.7 where the Zope 2 interfaces don't exist yet. If you want to do this, yuppie, feel free to do it. I would even be ok for this to be done for the 1.0 branch, provided you also add it on the trunk. If the interfaces change location due to bridging, this also means Five + 2.7 code would be incompatible with Zope 2.8 code that makes use of Five. I'm a bit worried about doing it now as it will take time and testing effort, then again, if we are to do it, it would be better to start moving things around before we release Zope 2.8.. +1. I have an intent (but no time so far) to make the equivalent change for CMFonFive, as well. Cool. Philipp ___ 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] Zope 2.8 b1 coming ...
Hi, last chance to commit your changes and patches and whatever for the first 2.8 beta release. I am going to make the release over the weekend. Andreas pgpqN7spNbUoH.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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] Zope 2.8 and Refresh: Uh-oh!
Just a reminder to myself, and a heads-up to others: I haven't tested this, but refreshing Five products usually doesn't work, and the same is probably true for 2.8. This needs to be tested, and if it is so, brilliant minds need to ponder it so we can get a solution. Or something. -- Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/ CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.org/ ___ 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] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?
Andreas Jung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and improves building navigation-trees or similar structures. Opinions? +1 if it's a separate new index (don't change the existing PathIndex). Does it provide a way of cataloging the ordering of children? Otherwise I don't see how you can build navigation tree using it (unless you don't care about ordering of course). Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?
Andreas Jung wrote: --On Donnerstag, 7. April 2005 14:49 Uhr +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and improves building navigation-trees or similar structures. Opinions? While the feature sounds cool, I tend to be a bit worried about delaying the Zope 2.8 release with this, Why delaying? Adding any features could delay the release, right? Perhaps this one is really easy so it won't introduce a large risk of delay; I can't evaluate that. 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] [Zope 2.8] Inclusion of ExtendedPathIndex?
--On Donnerstag, 7. April 2005 20:15 Uhr +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: --On Donnerstag, 7. April 2005 14:49 Uhr +0200 Martijn Faassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I wonder if it is of public interest to include the ExtendedPathIndex from Plone in Zope 2.8. It offers some the nice extension to limit the depth of the search and improves building navigation-trees or similar structures. Opinions? While the feature sounds cool, I tend to be a bit worried about delaying the Zope 2.8 release with this, Why delaying? Adding any features could delay the release, right? Perhaps this one is really easy so it won't introduce a large risk of delay; I can't evaluate that. Don't worry...everything's under control :-) Except the 2.8.a2 release almost all my releases where on the track. Andreas pgpRhMOXupP7U.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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] [Zope 2.8] release schedule
I have updated the Zope 2.8 wiki to reflect the planned schedule for Zope 2.8: http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.8/MilestonePlan Since we are trying to shift towards a fixed-date schedule every Zope 2 contributor should see this schedule as a chance and commitment to make contributions and fixes within this time frame. This schedule implies that all outstanding issues with Zope 2.8 have to be fixed before the final release. Andreas pgpQ8D6oQuQnK.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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] Zope 2.8 + Five post-sprint status
Hey everybody, We're wrapping up here at a very pleasant and productive Zope 2/3/Five sprint here in Paris. We've accomplished quite a lot, and we'll let you hear what this is in more detail soon. We've spent a lot of time with Zope 2.8, integrating Zope X3.0 and Five into it. Our work is on two branches: The five-integration branch: svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/Zope/branches/five-integration The trunk, which has synchups with Zope 2.7 fixes: svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/Zope/trunk The Five integration branch contains Five, and a version of Zope X3.0 made for integration with Zope 2.8 (as a svn:external). We hope that this branch can be merged into mainline Zope 2.x trunk soon. I hereby want to thank everybody here at the sprint who worked so hard on this. It's really your work, guys, I just kept the todo list. :) 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] Zope 2.8
Hi, I'm posting this again is i didn't got too much feedback on the first time (a single +1) with some meta questions: - Is the Zope 2.8 roadmap already fixed? - Does a proposal for the post-traverse-hook have a chance for 2.8? (The code is here completely working on 2.7, I only need to write tests.) Cheers, Christian -- Christian Theune, gocept gmbh co. kg http://www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] fon: 03496 3099112 fax: 03496 3099118 mobile: 0179 7808366 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ 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 )
