Python 2.2 (was Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!)
Lennart Regebro wrote: Are you planning to up the python version to 2.2? Because in that case I'd be happy to put in Authentication support in MailHost. Smtplib.py in 2.1.2 doesn't support authentication. I don't know how people are currently using Zope with 2.2. There is probably some really nasty problem being masked by the platform (seems to be Linux). See http://collector.zope.org/Zope/200 -- there's at least problems on Solaris and OpenBSD, probably others. ___ 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: Python 2.2 (was Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!)
In my own casual experimentation, Zope worked okay by itself on Mandrake Linux 8.2b4 with Python 2.2, but ZEO refused to work. For what it's worth. Gary - Original Message - From: Matt Behrens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lennart Regebro wrote: Are you planning to up the python version to 2.2? Because in that case I'd be happy to put in Authentication support in MailHost. Smtplib.py in 2.1.2 doesn't support authentication. I don't know how people are currently using Zope with 2.2. There is probably some really nasty problem being masked by the platform (seems to be Linux). See http://collector.zope.org/Zope/200 -- there's at least problems on Solaris and OpenBSD, probably others. ___ 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: Python 2.2 (was Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!)
I don't know how people are currently using Zope with 2.2. Well, I guess I could make a check for the Zope version, so not to tie up Zope 2.6 to Python 2.2. ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Are you planning to up the python version to 2.2? Because in that case I'd be happy to put in Authentication support in MailHost. Smtplib.py in 2.1.2 doesn't support authentication. ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
FYI, everyone who's following this: I have hijacked http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/InstallationAndConfiguration for this purpose. :-) Awesome. Exactly how I'd like the default zope install to be structured. :-) Adam ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Behrens Matt - Grand Rapids wrote: This isn't exciting by any means unless you're one of the people who package Zope up for distribution, or maybe you're one of the people who manage lots of little Zopes on one system; but I'd like to revive the grand unified Zope installation and control proposal that has been floated by many people (including me) in one form or another for some time FYI, everyone who's following this: I have hijacked http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/InstallationAndConfiguration for this purpose. :-) ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
I would like to second this idea. Adrian... -- The difficulty of tactical maneuvering consists in turning the devious into the direct, and misfortune into gain. - Sun Tzu - Original Message - From: Mario Valente [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors! Hi: I would like to propose my Paste Reference/symlink hack for inclusion into Zope 2.6 C U! -- Mario Valente ___ 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 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Hi: I think that the possibility of having inactive objects, objects that are instantied, exist in the ZODB and in the folder tree but are invisibile to the Zope machinery (acquisition, rendering, itemizing) by setting/unsettting a property flag would also be something of extreme usefulness. C U! -- Mario Valente ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Joachim Werner wrote: - All the basic API (like store, delete, edit, ...) must be free of HTTP specifics, so that I can modifiy content either over a web frontend or over WebDAV, FTP, ... - and even via a fat client application like a wxPython application. Currently that one is a mess. +5 Jerome ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Hi: I would like to propose my Paste Reference/symlink hack for inclusion into Zope 2.6 C U! -- Mario Valente ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Wednesday 06 March 2002 04:58 am, Joachim Werner wrote: Hi! What I'd expect from Zope 2.6 depends a bit on when Zope 3 will be available. If we are talking about a couple of months, I'd prefer only having bug fixes in 2.5.x (and no 2.6 at all). If we are talking about more than half a year, or even a year from now, things look different. The problem is that all time that is invested into Zope 2.6 will be lost for Zope 3 development, but on the other hand I can't imagine how I would convince a customer to fund Zope 3 development if the results will not be useable soon. So what we actually need is a Zope 2.5.x to 3 migration path and plan that justifies investments in either Zope 2.6 or Zope 3. For that, we'll have to answer a few questions, like - Are there any components in the Zope 3 development cycle that can be backported to the 2 series? personally i would be interested in a backport of the component architecture, but i think that focusing development efforts on the zope3 core, is a more useful allocation of resources. zope3 will be ready faster the more people are willing to work on it. i know that i've been guilty of having not worked on it, since i have need to finish developing projects now on zope2 before i get to work on it. that said, i really like some of the proposals on the table for 2.6, but i just don't think that backporting zope3 to zope2 is a good use of people's time. - Can we build stuff into 2.6 that makes people start thinking the Zope 3 way? - ... in this regard the component architecture would make the most sense... but again it would be fairly much a developer resource, and without the components, services, and utilities themselves it would just be lookup and structure to applications. most of whats in zope3 currently is architecture. I don't want Zope to end up like ArsDigita's ACS. They had a perfectly working 3 series that had all the features you'd expect, but was butt ugly in terms of the actual implementation. Then they started from scratch (like Zope is doing now) and built ACS 4, which was well-designed, but buggy as hell and had only core functionality. The plugins had not been ported yet. Then they started from scratch again and ported to Java (which Zope will not do I guess). regarding the acs4 there were many plugins (dude, packages is the preferred nomenclature ;) ported to the acs4 architecture. in fact there are more of them then there were for the 3x platform (partly in due to improved modularity). that platform still lives on and thrives today in the form of the openacs. and includes some services and functionality in the core that i hope zope3 will bring to zope land (package management, workflow, calendaring/events, etc...) the move to java and the fall of arsdigita came as direct result of tasting too much of that poisoned apple, known as venture capital. Currently there are 500 or so freely available Zope add-ons on zope.org, which will most probably not work on Zope 3, at least not with the 3X series. And there are even more non-free Zope products people have built on the 2 platform. I have the feeling that many of the add-ons will not be needed for Zope 3 because Zope 3 will do better out-of-the-box. But for many others there must be a migration path. i don't know how much discussion there has been on this, but its something worth discussing in more detail, namely the use of the ZopeLegacy system for zope2 products. when things are a little more settled down for zope3, an excellent piece of documentation would be a product porting guide. Let's take the database adapters. If Zope 3 does not support the major databases from the beginning, it might not get the momentum it needs. completely apriori, i think these will be a fairly easy thing to port ;) . Slightly off topic, I think what Zope (2 AND 3) need really urgently is another layer on top that delivers what the CMF (IMHO) did promise but not deliver to the extent I had expected: A solid foundation for Content Management Systems. just curious, what do you see as the problems with the cmf? snip good stuff and removed cross-posting cheers kapil ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
At 02:10 PM 3/6/2002 +0100, Jerome Alet wrote: On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Joachim Werner wrote: - All the basic API (like store, delete, edit, ...) must be free of HTTP specifics, so that I can modifiy content either over a web frontend or over WebDAV, FTP, ... - and even via a fat client application like a wxPython application. Currently that one is a mess. +5 Use and work with Zope 3. :-) PS: Please remember not to cross-post. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU - Physics and Chemistry Student Web2k - Web Design/Development Technical Project Management ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Joachim Werner writes: - Storage should be completely separate from the data model. It should be possible to design a content class and then store it either in ZODB, the file system, an RDBMS or an LDAP server or whatever. Isn't that already possible (implement your alternative storage that put pickles into your whatever store) - All the basic API (like store, delete, edit, ...) must be free of HTTP specifics, so that I can modifiy content either over a web frontend or over WebDAV, FTP, ... - and even via a fat client application like a wxPython application. Currently that one is a mess. I think, I do this already (with help of a PUT_factory). ... - The security API should really work. Currently there seem to be some really bad flaws with regard to checking for roles (and local roles). (I can go into details with that if somebody asks me and I find the time). Please do... - There should be a more rigid development model and tools to implement it. I like freedom... Currently it is hard for Zope developers to know where the business logic has to go. I never felt this as a problem... DTML really invited people to mix stuff, and ZPT seems a bit complicated to handle in terms of the actual syntax used. It isn't too readable either. Hm? I was able to explain the ZPT syntax to a newbie in about 1/4 of an hour... The essential parts: 5 tal attributes (there are more, but rarely used) 4 metal attributes 5 kinds of expressions Really not difficult, less difficult than DTML. Dieter ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
+1 for cookie crumbler Ah right, i didn't look at that before, thats what i thought of. And with the mention of the Zope Expansion Kit i think this really should go into core (or somewhere very next to id), including an option to be created with a standard user folder automatically. On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 05:18:38PM -0500, Shane Hathaway wrote: Christian Theune wrote: The implementation is done--use the cookie crumbler product. The only question is whether the cookie crumbler (under a different name ;-) ) out to be part of the main Zope 2 distribution. Shane -- Christian Theune - [EMAIL PROTECTED] gocept gmbh co.kg - schalaunische strasse 6 - 06366 koethen/anhalt tel.+49 3496 3099112 - fax.+49 3496 3099118 mob. - 0178 48 33 981 reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,[chr(ord(x)^42) for x in 'zS^BED\nX_FOY\x0b']) msg09578/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
See below This isn't exciting by any means unless you're one of the people who package Zope up for distribution, or maybe you're one of the people who manage lots of little Zopes on one system; but I'd like to revive the grand unified Zope installation and control proposal that has been floated by many people (including me) in one form or another for some time. Wikiwise, this would wrap up http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/ZopeStartupProvisions and http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/InstallationAndConfiguration, at least. To summarize, this would involve - an expanded build program with an installation scheme that would allow multiple versions of Zope to be present on the same system - making that installation 'secure by default' - a registry of Zope installations and one of instances and their configuration settings - a 'zopectl' program or similar that would be able to start and stop instances - a 'zopeinstance' program or similar that would become the _recommended_ way of setting up Zope, by creating an INSTANCE_HOME It would be nice if - the same framework could apply to Zope 3, maybe taking care of that piece ahead of time I'm more than willing to head this up, though I question how long we have before 2.6 to do so. Matt, I read 'InstallationAndConfiguration' page, and it made me wonder exactly how that aspect would work. Assuming some sort of distutils based setup [1], would something like the following be the desired approach? [2] #Installs zope in it's current simplest configuration. Equivalent of python wo_pcgi.py $ python setup.py #Equivalent of w_pcgi.py $ python setup.py pcgi #Creates SOFTWARE_HOME or ZOPE_HOME (I'm not sure if there's a difference, or which one I would mean) #I guess it would just do this in the current directory $ python setup.py zope_home #Creates an INSTANCE_HOME by prompting the user for a path (if not already given) to install to #Add's instance to some sort of registry [3] $ python setup.py instance [/path/to/instance] I don't really know what else to think about. I haven't ever used ZEO, so I don't have the first clue about that side of things. So, as you may be able to tell, I'm a little hazy on many (most?) aspects of this install/configure idea, but I'm quite keen on it. I've tried to post something that is at least mildly useful more in the hope that it may keep the proposal rolling rather than as a 'me too' or '+1' (as Paul E already told us off for ;-) ). I guess, at the end of the day, I can't really get around the fact it's a 'me too' without any coding commitment [4]. Do you have any concrete ideas for this? cheers tim [1] I've never used distutils before [2] Feel more than free to knock down and tear up anything I've said here :-) [3] Would this 'registry' be some sort of flat text file, or perhaps a zodb store, or...? [4] Apart from the fact that I've never written anything other than web-code (so my python probably isn't up to it), I can't commit time at the moment due to my degree having to take priority :-(. If there were any simply odd-jobs, testing, something I couldn't ballsup, I'd like to help if I can. ___ 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 )
(OT) Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 03:55, Anthony Baxter wrote: I think the performance hit is really quite minimal for two if statements at the entry and exit point(s) of a function to turn the behaviour on and off. I'm not convinced. Those small increments of performance really add up. Look at how Python's performance over time has degraded as one after another small bits of cruft accumulated. ?!?! :-) $ python1.5 pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 1 passes = 0.84 This machine benchmarks at 11904.8 pystones/second $ python2.1 pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 1 passes = 0.77 This machine benchmarks at 12987 pystones/second $ python2.2 pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 1 passes = 0.68 This machine benchmarks at 14705.9 pystones/second seb ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 03:47, Richard Jones wrote: On Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:40, Casey Duncan wrote: I agree, monkey patches are perfect for this. That makes them totally transparent to the application and Zope for that matter. There's nothing wrong with them in the right application. My main concern is the use of monkeypatching in the core makes it difficult for someone else to release a product that also MPs without them worrying about whether something has already patched code. Especially when we're talking about MP'ing so many core Zope objects (yes, I count 1 as so many :) I agree - altering classes at runtime is less predictable or discoverable than defining them statically. I think the current solution is really nice, but I don't see that it has any particular benefits over a static implementation, which has the benefit of following a standard, well-known pattern. I think the performance hit is really quite minimal for two if statements at the entry and exit point(s) of a function to turn the behaviour on and off. Yes - I would bet the performace difference is in the order of hundredths of a second. seb ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
seb bacon wrote: Yes - I would bet the performace difference is in the order of hundredths of a second. Which I would prefer not to have added to the several hundred other hundredths-of-a-second little differences-that-people-thought-wouldn't-make-a-difference that have been added to Zope over time... 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 10:47, Chris Withers wrote: seb bacon wrote: Yes - I would bet the performace difference is in the order of hundredths of a second. Which I would prefer not to have added to the several hundred other hundredths-of-a-second little differences-that-people-thought-wouldn't-make-a-difference that have been added to Zope over time... What, like ZPT? ;-P http://zope.nipltd.com/public/lists/dev-archive.nsf/ByKey/4084B02199CC6AFB (to save the bother of following the link, that's the thread from about a month ago regarding evidence suggesting ZPT may be *twice* as slow as DTML) seb ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Gary Poster wrote: If there is any interest in spiffing the Virtual Host Folder up for inclusion in Zope 2.6, I'll do the work. It requires Ordered Folder 0.5.1, and needs just a bit more spiffing. Why does it require ordered folder? What does that have to do with virtual hosting? 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 21:25, seb bacon wrote: Absolutely ... and I would also like to see Richards excellent Call Profiler service become part of the core. I'm definitely putting the profiler into 2.6 - there's just an open question of where it gets put. The question was asked on zope-coders, and got no response. I figure if no-one answers within a week of my original posting, I'll just check it in as a product. FWIW, my own opinion is that it should not take the 'MonkeyPatch' approach. That's my opinion too, but I have had no feedback from zope-coders... Richard ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
I'd like to see the ZSyncer Product, or a variant thereof, included in Zope by default. That is, I'd like Synchronization, to a be a default property of Zope objects, so that objects/content can be pushed and pulled between two Zope installations. Thanks for the enthusiasm but its still too hacky to go into the core. Ideally I'd rather put in the time so this is more transparent in Zope 3. -- Andy McKay ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Ive never really understood the motivation for wanting https support direct in Zope ZServer isnt robust enough to be exposed to the raw internet without risk. Today (and perhaps for the forseeable future, because its not clear that Zope want to take on the responsibility of ZServer may not be as robust as Apache or Squid but many, many people expose raw to the internet without problem (and compare that to other products from Redmond). The main motivation is that many people use Zope as a single solution, by installing Zope they can get everything they need to get a web site. By having the ZMI only available through HTTPS by default for example will definitely increase security and make Zope a better all in package. It obviously won't help the enterprise customer. Is there actually a huge amount of risk in this? The patches are there and seem to work ok most of the work seems to have been done already... -- Andy McKay ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Perhaps synchronization over ZEO as well as XML-RPC? Thoughts? Sean -Original Message- From: Andy McKay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 5:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors! I'd like to see the ZSyncer Product, or a variant thereof, included in Zope by default. That is, I'd like Synchronization, to a be a default property of Zope objects, so that objects/content can be pushed and pulled between two Zope installations. Thanks for the enthusiasm but its still too hacky to go into the core. Ideally I'd rather put in the time so this is more transparent in Zope 3. -- Andy McKay ___ 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 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
seb bacon wrote [CallProfiler] FWIW, my own opinion is that it should not take the 'MonkeyPatch' approach. Why? Any other approach means a slowdown in the Zope code regardless of whether profiling is turned on or off... monkeypatching means you end up with zero slowdown when not profiling. Anthony -- Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's never to late to have a happy childhood. ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
--- Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: seb bacon wrote [CallProfiler] FWIW, my own opinion is that it should not take the 'MonkeyPatch' approach. Why? Any other approach means a slowdown in the Zope code regardless of whether profiling is turned on or off... monkeypatching means you end up with zero slowdown when not profiling. Anthony I agree, monkey patches are perfect for this. That makes them totally transparent to the application and Zope for that matter. There's nothing wrong with them in the right application. -Casey __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - sign up for Fantasy Baseball http://sports.yahoo.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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:40, Casey Duncan wrote: I agree, monkey patches are perfect for this. That makes them totally transparent to the application and Zope for that matter. There's nothing wrong with them in the right application. My main concern is the use of monkeypatching in the core makes it difficult for someone else to release a product that also MPs without them worrying about whether something has already patched code. Especially when we're talking about MP'ing so many core Zope objects (yes, I count 1 as so many :) I think the performance hit is really quite minimal for two if statements at the entry and exit point(s) of a function to turn the behaviour on and off. Richard ps. don't forget Anthony, our first reaction when we both thought of this approach was *shudder* :) ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
From: Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gary Poster wrote: If there is any interest in spiffing the Virtual Host Folder up for inclusion in Zope 2.6, I'll do the work. It requires Ordered Folder 0.5.1, and needs just a bit more spiffing. Why does it require ordered folder? What does that have to do with virtual hosting? Well--the best answer is to suggest you look at it. The next best answer is to say that the ability to order virtual host rules (as in, for instance, the Apache httpd.conf virtual host section) is very convenient. And the full-blown I-can't-help-but-give-an-example is this. The Virtual Host Folder (hereafter VHF) holds implementations of IHost. Each IHost implementation is responsible for mappings to one virtual Zope root. (There is an exception but I'm not going in to it here). So if, for instance, your site is mysite.com and you wanted to have all subdomains (www.mysite.com, anything.mysite.com, etc.) go to a given zope root then you create one host object that uses a regular expression like ^(.*\.|)mysite.com$ and points to your desired virtual zope root. Then, if you in fact want certain subdomains at mysite.com to have a different Zope root, create a new host pointing to your alternate root and use a simple match like special.mysite.com Move this host higher than the catch-all host in the VHF using the OrderedFolder controls and you are set to go. While I did in fact roll my own ordered folder-like mix-in for this purpose initially (so I would have no dependencies), using OrderedFolder allows developers to create their own personalized implementations of the IHost interface (somebody wanted to hook their DNS and email system to their hosts, for instance, and this is not easily generalized) and just drop the new implementations (or subclasses) into the Products folder without making any changes to the VirtualHostFolder distribution itself. And by the way: TO DO list on the VHF before it would be any kind of core candidate: 1) TESTS 2) Some kind of fish bowl to more rigorously plan an API--not convinced I can get critical mass of interest behind it to make it worthwhile though... maybe I'll get around to it and we'll see. 3) OrderedFolder has some ZBabel-related problems on one of my installations; not sure of the cause/fix yet. Gary ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Anthony Baxter wrote: seb bacon wrote [CallProfiler] FWIW, my own opinion is that it should not take the 'MonkeyPatch' approach. Why? Any other approach means a slowdown in the Zope code regardless of whether profiling is turned on or off... monkeypatching means you end up with zero slowdown when not profiling. ...and in this case, I wouldn't call it MonkeyPatch-ing, just taking advantage of Python's extremely dynamic nature for a very good cause. 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 03:00:10PM +, Toby Dickenson wrote: Are there any common scenarios which need the protection given by https, but do not need the protection given by a front-end-proxy? Yes, running zope in intranet environments where the connection to a localhost proxy is not possible (like running it on NT for an intranet service, when you *can't* install an apache just for doing the ssl things) and you don't want to expose the uncrypted data stream to the environment. is that a valid requirement? greetings. christian -- Christian Theune - [EMAIL PROTECTED] gocept gmbh co.kg - schalaunische strasse 6 - 06366 koethen/anhalt tel.+49 3496 3099112 - fax.+49 3496 3099118 mob. - 0178 48 33 981 reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,[chr(ord(x)^42) for x in 'zS^BED\nX_FOY\x0b']) msg09528/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 07:53:35AM -0500, Paul Everitt wrote: A gentle reminder on some of the posts in this thread. Please don't respond with I'd really like some good idea. Respond with I'm willing to do the work for some good idea. That's part of the point with Brian's note. You don't _have_ to do the code work. If you write up the docs for some good idea, you've likely done most of the work. --Paul Hmm ... there was a post on the zope users list concerning logouts from ZMI, and i think that is a thing that could be *really* better (cookie login with a nice form or so) and i would like to contribute but am not sure if i am able to do the implementation work. -- Christian Theune - [EMAIL PROTECTED] gocept gmbh co.kg - schalaunische strasse 6 - 06366 koethen/anhalt tel.+49 3496 3099112 - fax.+49 3496 3099118 mob. - 0178 48 33 981 reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,[chr(ord(x)^42) for x in 'zS^BED\nX_FOY\x0b']) msg09529/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Christian Theune wrote: On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 07:53:35AM -0500, Paul Everitt wrote: A gentle reminder on some of the posts in this thread. Please don't respond with I'd really like some good idea. Respond with I'm willing to do the work for some good idea. That's part of the point with Brian's note. You don't _have_ to do the code work. If you write up the docs for some good idea, you've likely done most of the work. --Paul Hmm ... there was a post on the zope users list concerning logouts from ZMI, and i think that is a thing that could be *really* better (cookie login with a nice form or so) and i would like to contribute but am not sure if i am able to do the implementation work. The implementation is done--use the cookie crumbler product. The only question is whether the cookie crumbler (under a different name ;-) ) out to be part of the main Zope 2 distribution. Shane ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
If there is any interest in spiffing the Virtual Host Folder up for inclusion in Zope 2.6, I'll do the work. It requires Ordered Folder 0.5.1, and needs just a bit more spiffing. Gary -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lennart Regebro Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 2:54 AM To: Brian Lloyd; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] 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. OK. The things I'd like to see included is the Enhanced Virtual Host Monster that iMeme did, or maybe even the Virtual Host Folder that is being developed now (I haven't tried that one out, but it looks good on paper). I'd also like the functionality provided by the local roles blacklist enhancement we did ( http://www.zope.org/Members/regebro/LRBlacklist ). And of course, the bugs that we have reported fixed. :-) Can't think of anything more right now. ___ 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 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
I'd like to see ZSQL methods altered so that bind variables could be used in SQL queries. This would improve SQL operations for at least Oracle, which is the one db I know of that uses bind variables to speed it's querie-management. This is filed as a bugreport in the collector previously but has been turned down/put on hold until a newer version of zope. What is the time schedule of Zope 2.6? I ask because I need to start using 2.5 before I suggest more improvements to zope :-) /dario - Dario Lopez-Kästen Systems Developer Chalmers Univ. of Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ will yield no hitsIT Systems Services ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Absolutely ... and I would also like to see Richards excellent Call Profiler service become part of the core. I'm definitely putting the profiler into 2.6 - there's just an open question of where it gets put. The question was asked on zope-coders, and got no response. I figure if no-one answers within a week of my original posting, I'll just check it in as a product. Richard, FWIW, my own opinion is that it should not take the 'MonkeyPatch' approach. seb ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
I'd like to see the ZSyncer Product, or a variant thereof, included in Zope by default. That is, I'd like Synchronization, to a be a default property of Zope objects, so that objects/content can be pushed and pulled between two Zope installations. I would use ZCVSFolder or somewhat likely that included instead of ZSyncer. I think the use cases driving synchronisation requirements are not yet sufficiently understood. Agreed, it's a feature that many people need, but I get the impression it would be premature to include ZSyncer as is in Zope without more detailed planning. On the other hand, there is an argument which says, ZSyncer is a good product used by a lot of people, let's put it in Zope and deal with any issues after the event. seb ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
seb bacon wrote: I think the use cases driving synchronisation requirements are not yet sufficiently understood. Agreed, it's a feature that many people need, but I get the impression it would be premature to include ZSyncer as is in Zope without more detailed planning. On the other hand, there is an argument which says, ZSyncer is a good product used by a lot of people, let's put it in Zope and deal with any issues after the event. Yeah... maybe we need a standard Zope Expansion Kit that is a cohesive package of products that aren't in the Zope core, but are officially sanctioned and versioned and released alongside versions of Zope. -- Steve Alexander ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Steve Alexander wrote: Yeah... maybe we need a standard Zope Expansion Kit that is a cohesive package of products that aren't in the Zope core, but are officially sanctioned and versioned and released alongside versions of Zope. I thought that's what the /Products directory in the standard Zoep distributino was? ;-) 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
I'd suggest starting with the combination of Evan's zopemake and zctl scripts. One thing that zopemake could be extended with is an autoconf-style configure that figures out where the appropriate version of Python is, which C compiler to use, etc. - C - Original Message - From: Paul Everitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Behrens Matt - Grand Rapids [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 7:53 AM Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors! +1, and I say that knowing that it means I have to help. I'm willing to write the docs for whoever works on the code. A gentle reminder on some of the posts in this thread. Please don't respond with I'd really like some good idea. Respond with I'm willing to do the work for some good idea. That's part of the point with Brian's note. You don't _have_ to do the code work. If you write up the docs for some good idea, you've likely done most of the work. --Paul Behrens Matt - Grand Rapids wrote: Brian Lloyd wrote: Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6. This isn't exciting by any means unless you're one of the people who package Zope up for distribution, or maybe you're one of the people who manage lots of little Zopes on one system; but I'd like to revive the grand unified Zope installation and control proposal that has been floated by many people (including me) in one form or another for some time. Wikiwise, this would wrap up http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/ZopeStartupProvisions and http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/InstallationAndConfiguration, at least. To summarize, this would involve - an expanded build program with an installation scheme that would allow multiple versions of Zope to be present on the same system - making that installation 'secure by default' - a registry of Zope installations and one of instances and their configuration settings - a 'zopectl' program or similar that would be able to start and stop instances - a 'zopeinstance' program or similar that would become the _recommended_ way of setting up Zope, by creating an INSTANCE_HOME It would be nice if - the same framework could apply to Zope 3, maybe taking care of that piece ahead of time I'm more than willing to head this up, though I question how long we have before 2.6 to do so. ___ 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 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 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
I would say, make SSL part of the standard z2.py, so you can turn on/off, specify address, etc. of https ports just as you do with http ports (and of course integrated with siteaccess2, etc.) ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 09:48:08 -0500, marc lindahl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would say, make SSL part of the standard z2.py, so you can turn on/off, specify address, etc. of https ports just as you do with http ports (and of course integrated with siteaccess2, etc.) Ive never really understood the motivation for wanting https support direct in Zope ZServer isnt robust enough to be exposed to the raw internet without risk. Today (and perhaps for the forseeable future, because its not clear that Zope want to take on the responsibility of ensuring it is that robust) if you care about security Zope really needs to be run behind a front-end-proxy, and the two popular choices for proxying, Squid and Apache, are already well endowed for https support. Are there any common scenarios which need the protection given by https, but do not need the protection given by a front-end-proxy? Toby Dickenson [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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On 3/1/02 7:30 AM, Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd suggest starting with the combination of Evan's zopemake and zctl scripts. One thing that zopemake could be extended with is an autoconf-style configure that figures out where the appropriate version of Python is, which C compiler to use, etc. Can't the distutils framework be used? It's got all of the utilities to deal with various platform issues already. -- Jeffrey P Shell www.cuemedia.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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 04:16, Dario Lopez-Kästen wrote: I'd like to see ZSQL methods altered so that bind variables could be used in SQL queries. +1, even though MySQL doesn't bind variables (yet, apparently in the works for 4.0). Another thing I would like (and could probably write) is an additional skip_rows parameter (default 0) to Z SQL Methods to complement max_rows. Since this needs to be passed to the DA's query(), and no DA's currently accept this parameter, one of these things need to happen: 1) Trap the TypeError that results from calling a query() that doesn't recognize skip_rows (used as a keyword parameter). In that case, fall back to query(q, max_rows+skip_rows) and return result[skip_rows:] in the Z SQL Method. 2) Add a new DA method query_range(q, skip_rows, max_rows); if AttributeError, fall back like #1. 3) Simply require all DA's to implement it in query() as a keyword parameter to maintain backwards compatibility with older Zopes. Adding this would make Z SQL Methods work a bit more like dtml-in ... start=skip_rows size=max_rows. There may be issues with result caching, but I don't think it'll be too much of a problem. -- Andy Dustman PGP: 0x930B8AB6 @ .net http://dustman.net/andy You can have my keys when you pry them from my dead, cold neurons. ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Brian Lloyd wrote: Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6. This isn't exciting by any means unless you're one of the people who package Zope up for distribution, or maybe you're one of the people who manage lots of little Zopes on one system; but I'd like to revive the grand unified Zope installation and control proposal that has been floated by many people (including me) in one form or another for some time. Wikiwise, this would wrap up http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/ZopeStartupProvisions and http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/InstallationAndConfiguration, at least. To summarize, this would involve - an expanded build program with an installation scheme that would allow multiple versions of Zope to be present on the same system - making that installation 'secure by default' - a registry of Zope installations and one of instances and their configuration settings - a 'zopectl' program or similar that would be able to start and stop instances - a 'zopeinstance' program or similar that would become the _recommended_ way of setting up Zope, by creating an INSTANCE_HOME It would be nice if - the same framework could apply to Zope 3, maybe taking care of that piece ahead of time I'm more than willing to head this up, though I question how long we have before 2.6 to do so. ___ 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-Coders] Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Thursday 28 February 2002 04:03 pm, you wrote: Brian Lloyd wrote: Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6. This isn't exciting by any means unless you're one of the people who package Zope up for distribution, or maybe you're one of the people who manage lots of little Zopes on one system; but I'd like to revive the grand unified Zope installation and control proposal that has been floated by many people (including me) in one form or another for some time. Wikiwise, this would wrap up http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/ZopeStartupProvisions and http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/InstallationAndConfiguration, at least. To summarize, this would involve - an expanded build program with an installation scheme that would allow multiple versions of Zope to be present on the same system +1 I just did this manually yesterday and it would be *really* nice to have it work like this out of the box. I think it would really improve first impressions of Zope from a site admin perspective. /---\ Casey Duncan, Sr. Web Developer National Legal Aid and Defender Association [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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
I've modified HTTPResponse and ZServer/HTTPResponse.py to allow for gzip content encoding on a response-by-response basis. I'm mostly using this with xml-rpc, but it could be generalized and combined with a gzipper- cache manager. I'd like this. It would help with the lack of transfer-encoding by Squid. ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Hmm... would this still work with Squid or Apache caching in front of Zope? I assume that since each browser can accept different transfer-encodings, this has to be done as close to the browser as possible, otherwise content sent in one transfer encoding would be sent to every user if it was to be cached (in other words, instead this would have to be done using the experimental Squid TE code)... Sean -Original Message- From: Chris McDonough [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 2:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors! I've modified HTTPResponse and ZServer/HTTPResponse.py to allow for gzip content encoding on a response-by-response basis. I'm mostly using this with xml-rpc, but it could be generalized and combined with a gzipper- cache manager. I'd like this. It would help with the lack of transfer-encoding by Squid. ___ 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 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6 I'd like to see the ZSyncer Product, or a variant thereof, included in Zope by default. That is, I'd like Synchronization, to a be a default property of Zope objects, so that objects/content can be pushed and pulled between two Zope installations. I venture a guess that the development/production model is common, and this helps quite a bit in maintaining this model. Ziniti ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6 I'd like to see the ZSyncer Product, or a variant thereof, included in Zope by default. That is, I'd like Synchronization, to a be a default property of Zope objects, so that objects/content can be pushed and pulled between two Zope installations. I venture a guess that the development/production model is common, and this helps quite a bit in maintaining this model. Ziniti Absolutely ... and I would also like to see Richards excellent Call Profiler service become part of the core. It is an (absolutely) essential tool for a number of reasons. My impression from previous threads is that others feel the same way too. I would also like to know what level of effort it would take to ramp-up transparent folders so that it could be considered core ready??? Anyway, my two cents... Eric ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:17, Eric Roby wrote: Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6 I'd like to see the ZSyncer Product, or a variant thereof, included in Zope by default. That is, I'd like Synchronization, to a be a default property of Zope objects, so that objects/content can be pushed and pulled between two Zope installations. I venture a guess that the development/production model is common, and this helps quite a bit in maintaining this model. Ziniti Absolutely ... and I would also like to see Richards excellent Call Profiler service become part of the core. I'm definitely putting the profiler into 2.6 - there's just an open question of where it gets put. The question was asked on zope-coders, and got no response. I figure if no-one answers within a week of my original posting, I'll just check it in as a product. Richard ___ 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] Zope 2.6 planning - call for contributors!
Hi, John Ziniti schrieb: Let's get a discussion started to define 2.6 I'd like to see the ZSyncer Product, or a variant thereof, included in Zope by default. That is, I'd like Synchronization, to a be a default property of Zope objects, so that objects/content can be pushed and pulled between two Zope installations. I would use ZCVSFolder or somewhat likely that included instead of ZSyncer. The problem i see is that we have a development server and more than one production instances in our organisation. If a product comes out of its development state it is moved to the production server. If you use ZSyncer then all Objects zsynced over all instances have the same version, but if you use ZCVSFolder instead then you have a version-control mechanism of all objects on the different instances. I venture a guess that the development/production model is common, and this helps quite a bit in maintaining this model. Ziniti ___ 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 ) -- Andre SchubertEMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 03774 6625-78 km3 teledienst GmbH Fax: 03774 6625-79 ___ 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] 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. OK. The things I'd like to see included is the Enhanced Virtual Host Monster that iMeme did, or maybe even the Virtual Host Folder that is being developed now (I haven't tried that one out, but it looks good on paper). I'd also like the functionality provided by the local roles blacklist enhancement we did ( http://www.zope.org/Members/regebro/LRBlacklist ). And of course, the bugs that we have reported fixed. :-) Can't think of anything more right now. ___ 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 )
