Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-9-4 16:49 +0200:
> ...
>I for one prefer exceptions over manual error handling. And I prefer
>straight-forward APIs over unnecessarily complicated constructs.
But you probably would not prefer if these "straight-forward APIs"
were continously changing.
I pr
Tres Seaver wrote at 2006-9-2 13:03 -0400:
> ...
>I'm OK with having "in-tree" code not use zapi, but I don't see a win in
>propagating all the mess out to the rest of the world. I'll also note
>that "janitorial deprecation" is way too common in the tree today:
>people decide they don't like the n
Roger Ineichen wrote at 2006-8-25 18:27 +0200:
> ...
>The reason why;
>We really have no time to do this in the next couple of
>month. And the option sombody else doing it is also *NO*
>option because we have allready productive projects build
>on this libraries and have no time to migrate them fo
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-8-13 23:09 +0200:
> ...
>forker.shutdown_zeo_server(adminaddr)
> File "src/ZEO/tests/forker.py", line 182, in shutdown_zeo_server
>s.connect(adminaddr)
> File "", line 1, in connect
>error: (22, 'Invalid argument')
Looks as if "adminaddr" where not
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2006-8-7 12:53 +0200:
>On 5 Aug 2006, at 22:38, Dieter Maurer wrote:
>> Florent Guillaume wrote at 2006-8-5 00:17 +0200:
>>> Stuart Bishop wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> I've been wondering if making pytz work like this was a correct
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2006-8-5 00:17 +0200:
>Stuart Bishop wrote:
> ...
>> I've been wondering if making pytz work like this was a correct decision. It
>> seems that people who know enough to care about DST transition periods
>> generally work in UTC anyway
>
>What makes you say that? Any appl
Roy Mathew wrote at 2006-7-11 17:36 -0700:
>I have what seems to be an odd problem with persistence of information
>in simultaneous sessions.
>
>I keep track of an iterator in an object that is persistent (one
>instance per-session). The iterator is updated as the user navigates a
>sequence of obje
Tim Peters wrote at 2006-6-21 18:58 -0400:
> ...
>[Dieter]
>> Why not simply change this, i.e. let "BTree" use what Python
>> calls an "int" (i.e. a "C long").
>>
>> Of course, we need to be a bit careful, when we load pickles.
>> They might have been written by applications with a longer
>> "C lon
Tim Peters wrote at 2006-6-17 14:50 -0400:
> ...
>The problem arises because what _Python_ calls "int" is what C calls
>"long", but the I-flavor BTree code stores C "int", and C "int"
>doesn't correspond to any Python type (except "by accident" on 32-bit
>boxes).
Why not simply change this, i.e. l
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote at 2006-5-30 22:13 +0200:
> ...
>Dieter Maurer wrote:
> ...
>> In my view the translation domain is vital for translators --
>> as the domain guides the correct translations.
> ...
>But it is the application that eventually sets the domain
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote at 2006-5-30 12:01 +0200:
> ...
>although -- while thinking about it, putting the domain name in .po
>files breaks the separation on concerns between translators and
>application developer. Translators shouldn't have to worry about
>translation domains. That's applicati
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-5-24 18:16 +0200:
> ...
>Yup. We could think about this for some future release cycle, though.
>I'd very much be in favour of making nocall: the default and introduce
>something like call:. Then sniffing for callableness wouldn't be necessary.
You are aware
Dmitry Vasiliev wrote at 2006-5-23 17:06 +0400:
> ...
>PEP-3100 suggest "just call the object and catch the exception" instead of use
>"callable()". So maybe we can write:
>
>try:
> ob()
>except:
> pass
>return ob
>
>Unfortunately exceptions still will be masked.
Yes, and therefore *NEVER
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-5-23 17:02 +0200:
> ...
>callable() isn't even deprecated yet, so if it solves our problem, we
>can use it IMO. Note that Zope 3 deliberately doesn't use it because of
>the proxy problem. Zope 2 works around that by stripping
>proxies/wrappers first (ob.aq_ba
Adam Groszer wrote at 2006-5-9 14:36 +0200:
> ...
>[snip]
>JF> Python simply does not support a general robust reload, other than
>JF> restart.
>[snip]
>
>What about pushing the problem then to the lower level, to Python
>itself. I think all developers are fighting the same problem, so all
>Python
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-5-9 07:22 -0400:
> ...
> Finally, there's a lot of interest in generating configuration
> actions in Python, rather than ZCML. I suspect that avoiding
> XML processing, conversion, and validation might speed startup
> quite a bit.
Moreover, if the componen
Stuart Bishop wrote at 2006-3-20 10:38 +0700:
>Also, there is only one schema.xml so multiple components can't each insert
>their own blob of configuration information into the global schema.
Please read
> From: Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: zope3-dev@zope.org
> Subject: [Zope3-dev] Re: h
Jeff Shell wrote at 2006-3-15 14:26 -0700:
> ...
>Anyways, I don't mind if someone wants 'browser:addform' as an add-on.
>But I don't think those things belong in the core. If someone wants to
>make a package that lets them "build a web site using nothing but ZCML
>to glue a bunch of crap together!
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-3-15 07:29 -0500:
> ...
>Magic always has the downside that it
>hides things. Often, as in the case of garbage collection, the benefit
>outweighs the cost. Too often though, people introduce magic
>(aka abstraction, indirection, automation) when the benefit doesn't
>justi
Lennart Regebro wrote at 2006-3-14 21:17 +0100:
>On 3/14/06, Dieter Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Aspect orientation does this:
>>
>> Use a given unprepared implementation and add all kinds
>> of aspects to them: logging, tracing, persistence, additi
Lennart Regebro wrote at 2006-3-14 09:19 +0100:
>On 3/14/06, Sidnei da Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That is, to me, a very important feature. To be able to write some
>> python module that does not depend on Zope 3 at import time, but is
>> 'hooked into' Zope 3 externally, with ZCML, at 'con
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-3-14 07:23 -0500:
> ...
>> * Setting up the indexes in a catalog.
>
>definition
Really?
I would consider it configuration -- even "high level" configuration.
> ...
>BTW, a general thing to keep in mind:
>
>- Indirection and abstraction are inherently bad because they
>
Sidnei da Silva wrote at 2006-3-13 20:21 -0300:
> ...
>That is, to me, a very important feature. To be able to write some
>python module that does not depend on Zope 3 at import time, but is
>'hooked into' Zope 3 externally, with ZCML, at 'configuration time'.
>
>As I understand, no other framework
Roger Ineichen wrote at 2006-3-13 21:57 +0100:
> ...
>I think ZCML is defently not configuration in the clasic
>understanding of configuration. Defining directives in ZCML
>means we bind components together to a application.
>If developer share this configuration layer with admins and
>use it for t
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-3-12 15:54 -0500:
>Dieter Maurer wrote:
>> Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-3-11 18:03 -0500:
>>
>>>...
>>>Where is this documented?
>>
>>
>> I do not know. I saw a feature description in the mailing list.
>> Fred
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2006-3-13 17:15 +0100:
> ...
>A newer interpretation of ZCML is:
>
>"""
>ZCML is a configuration language that configures a number of basic
>directives for configuring the component architecture and security:
>adapters, utilities, security requirements, and little else. E
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-3-11 18:03 -0500:
> ...
>Where is this documented?
I do not know. I saw a feature description in the mailing list.
Fred and Tres (the authors) should be able to tell you whether
there is a formal documentation and where you can find it.
>Let's pursue this a bit.
>
>Would
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-3-11 11:35 -0500:
> ...
>You haven't responded to my desire to use a single configuration file
>for multiple applications. Perhaps because you don't consider this
>to be important, which is understandable.
You guessed right.
> I do consider this to be
>important though.
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-3-7 01:16 +0100:
>Dieter Maurer wrote:
>> ...
>> While ZConfig allows you the describe related material together
>> and without indirections, the ConfigParser format forces you
>> to introduce indirections and to spread related d
Fred Drake wrote at 2006-3-6 14:16 -0500:
> ...
>When Tres and I added this, we planned specifically to see how it was
received by the Zope 2 community.
At least, I like it.
> ...
>That said, I don't think Jim's concerns are limited to the Zope
>configuration schema, but extend to configurations
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-3-5 13:56 -0500:
> ...
>Why do you think it's better to have to create a monolithic schema for all
>applications bits that want to use the configuration file, rather than letting
>individual applications define how to read their own data independently?
You already can do t
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote at 2006-3-5 18:17 +0100:
> ...
>Looking at your examples (especially the long one), I find the ZConfig
>version much easier to read.
While ZConfig allows you the describe related material together
and without indirections, the ConfigParser format forces you
to intro
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2006-3-3 18:13 +0100:
>Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 11:49:31 -, Lennart Regebro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This should be Zope3 as it is now. A couple of things can go away.
>>> Maybe the rotterdam skin, I don't know. Definitely the default F
Lennart Regebro wrote at 2006-3-2 20:39 +0100:
> ...
>2. Zope3 may also get slightly streamlined, so that Zope3 is what is
>needed to run Zope2 but not more. That means that Zope3 would lose the
>ZMI.
I would consider this a severe loss.
The ZMI provides menu guided operations.
This is much easie
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2006-3-2 18:44 +0100:
> ...
>I worry about losing brands we've worked on hard to establish. While
>many people do not understand the difference between Zope 2 and Zope 3,
> many others have heard about Zope 3 and they know it is not Zope 2.
I do not understand the "loss
Stephan Richter wrote at 2006-2-5 09:32 -0500:
> ...
>On Friday 03 February 2006 17:23, Dieter Maurer wrote:
>> Stephan Richter wrote at 2006-2-3 12:45 -0500:
>> > ...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> The "declareS
Stephan Richter wrote at 2006-2-3 12:45 -0500:
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
The "declareSite" looks redundant. I see at the "site name='mysite'" element
that a site with name "mysite" is declared...
--
Dieter
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub:
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2006-1-27 13:21 +0100:
> ...
>Five actually adds a 'five' namespace, which I think is very useful --
>it clearly marks which directives are only there for Zope 2 and thus you
>cannot expect them to work in Zope 3. Not having namespaces would make
>this a lot harder to ma
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2006-1-26 12:57 +0100:
> ...
>I thought Tres had added to ZConfig the possibility to have arbitrary
>key/values for arbitrary additional products. Or was this only in the
>context of Zope 2 ?
It is essentially the "%import package" extension of ZConfig.
It allows "pack
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-1-25 17:26 -0500:
>Sidnei da Silva wrote:
>> In Zope 2, we had excess of configuration options and environment
>> variables.
>
>How did you have access to configuration options?
"from App.config import getConfiguration; config = getConfiguration()".
--
Dieter
___
Stephan Richter wrote at 2006-1-26 10:16 -0500:
>On Thursday 26 January 2006 10:04, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> Every change I've ever been involved with has been extremely painful.
>> I can't even explain well what made it painful because I didn't really
>> understand what was going on and needed help fr
Fred Drake wrote at 2006-1-23 09:56 -0500:
>On 1/23/06, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As I said earlier, I think XML is wrong for configuration for exactly
>> this kind of reason... element-based is right for this type of config,
>> it's why Apache uses, it's why Zope 2 uses it, and i
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2006-1-23 18:27 +0100:
> ...
>For one, ZConfig is a
>syntax not very well known, even granting its similarity to the Apache
>configuration language, while XML is very well known.
Come on:
The only "syntactic" part of "ZConfig" is: there are
keys with values and sect
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2006-1-19 19:37 +0100:
> ...
>I'm talking about a Zope 2 release including (most of) what's in a Zope
>3 release, so that Five developers can work on exposing *that* in Zope 2
>too (which can then be part of the next Zope 2 release as we integrate
>the newer Five in it).
Paul Winkler wrote at 2006-1-20 10:26 -0500:
> ...
>Does this mean we could potentially change zconfig options at
>runtime?
What do you mean by that?
You can already now change "zconfig" options at runtime
(you can modify the object returned by "getConfiguration()").
But usually, it will have li
Rocky Burt wrote at 2006-1-18 23:13 -0330:
>Marius Gedminas wrote:
>> * I can copy the URL and paste it directly into a browser
>> * I can right-click on the URL, and choose "Open in web browser" from
>> the popup menu that GNOME terminal gives me.
>>
>> What do you think about changing Zo
Benji York wrote at 2006-1-4 14:22 -0500:
>Dieter Maurer wrote:
>> Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-1-3 14:41 -0500:
>>>I think 12 months is a bit short. I don't think the backward-compatibility
>>>code
>>>is that burdonsome, once written. What do other folks th
Tim Peters wrote at 2006-1-4 14:51 -0500:
>[Dieter Maurer]
>> If the backward compatibility period gets shorter,
>> we will skip more and more releases because of the increased burden
>> to get our applications running again...
>
>Well, every new release will remove fea
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-1-3 14:41 -0500:
> ...
>I think 12 months is a bit short. I don't think the backward-compatibility
>code
>is that burdonsome, once written. What do other folks think?
If the backward compatibility period gets shorter,
we will skip more and more releases because of the i
Alexander Limi wrote at 2005-12-30 11:22 +0100:
> ...
>One of the ugliest and most error-prone parts of TAL is its handling of
>multiple attributes:
>
>
>
Why is this more ugly or error prone as your proposal?
> ...
>This provides the following benefits:
>
>- Easier to parse for XML tools (no s
Jim Washington wrote at 2005-12-16 16:23 -0500:
> ...
>What seems to work for me now is the following as
>mysqldbda.adapter.MySQLdbAdapter.isConnected()
>
>def isConnected(self):
>try:
>self._v_connection.ping()
>except:
># not connected or ping did not rest
Jim Washington wrote at 2005-12-13 21:40 -0500:
> ...
>Now, looking closer at the code, a ping like this might be not too bad,
>because isConnected() is only called when a connection is requested, not
>for every SQL statement executed. So, it might not be so onerous as
>originally thought. Stil
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-12-6 08:49 -0500:
>I still don't like the implicit translation of message ids
+ 1
--
Dieter
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote at 2005-12-6 16:46 +0100:
> ...
>CMFSetup uses sax, GenericSetup uses sax too. ZCML relies on sax... Does
>it mean that writing a sax parser is the way to go,
No need to write one -- Python comes with one...
--
Dieter
___
Zop
Stephan Richter wrote at 2005-11-28 08:02 -0500:
> ...
>If people would use the mechanize objects,
>their test code could not be converted to tutorials.
Then some test could not be converted to tutorials...
Is that really worse than being unable to test quite interesting use cases
(such as file u
Benji York wrote at 2005-11-25 11:17 -0500:
> ...
>They are clear in what they say, but they do not say that a user of
>zope.testbrowser shouldn't depend on them and that they may go away at
>any time. Even if it did I don't think that would be sufficient, I
>don't think the docs should mention
John Ziniti wrote at 2005-11-21 15:04 -0500:
> ...
>Zope-2.8.1 now additionally has the zope.app.publication.
>HTTPPublicationRequestFactory class, which also assumes
>that "text/xml" means xmlrpc (in fact, it assumes that
>anything that startswith('text/xml') is an xmlrpc call).
"zope.app" is par
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-11-21 09:43 -0500:
> ...
>A Python convention is that a leading underscore indicates privateness.
>
>> - what about import paths inside a same package: relative or absolute?
>>
>>from mypackage.interfaces import ISomeInterface
>> or:
>>from interfaces import ISomeI
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-10-21 15:42 -0400:
> ...
[Tim]
>>>I'm sure sys.setdefaultencoding will vanish in a future Python
>>>release, since it wasn't intended to persist beyond initial
>>>development to begin with.
[DM]
>> Hopefully only after Python cleaned up the separation
>> between text and b
Tim Peters wrote at 2005-10-21 15:27 -0400:
> ...
>[Dieter Maurer]
>> Nowadays, life is hell without a sensible "setdefaultencoding":
>>
>> Many isolated modules intersperse unicode in an otherwise
>> "string" dominated world causing
Tim Peters wrote at 2005-10-19 15:15 -0400:
> ...
>When the Unicode type was added, people disagreed on what the
>[default] encoding should be (ASCII, ISO-8859-1, or UTF-8), so the
>setdefaultencoding hook was added so we could play with it.
>Unfortunately, nobody got around to remo
Stephan Richter wrote at 2005-10-13 08:08 -0400:
>On Thursday 13 October 2005 07:02, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>> sub part:
>> For zodb objects, i was wondering if we could somehow size what's beeing
>> pickled, since it's just a buffer.
>> we could therefore measure the size of what's beeing serialized i
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-8-31 17:05 -0400:
> ...
>I'm interested in hearing what people think about this in general.
>Should we make far reaching code changes to enforce a consistent
>style? Or should we update style when making other changes?
>I tend to do the later. I think that the developers
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2005-8-25 13:49 +0200:
> ... AdvancedQuery ...
>I need to figure out the lazy sorting concept too and how to port it to
>the Zope 3 catalog... I see elsewhere in the thread you also mention it
>supports a simple form of joins, which is also very interesting.
No, "Advance
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2005-8-24 12:27 +0200:
> ...
>Underfeatured query API
>---
>
>I do think that currently the API to query it is woefully underfeatured.
>
>I've tried to work on this problem and am sitting on some code that just
>needs a bit of time to polish and release
Martijn Faassen wrote at 2005-8-24 17:28 +0200:
> ...
>In your example you haven't done a join as I describe above, unless I
>miss something. The essential part is that I want an object with state
>'PUBLISHED' unless there is another object where field 'ID' is the same
>as this object that is wi
Garrett Smith wrote at 2005-7-24 17:36 -0500:
>Is there any info published on debugging Zope3 deadlocks? I'd like to see
>tracebacks of a couple threads. Has anyone done this w/Zope3?
"threadframe" might help a bit.
Florent used it to debug deadlocks for Zope2 (--> see its "DeadlockDebugger").
I
Dmitry Vasiliev wrote at 2005-7-12 18:19 +0400:
>Some time ago there has been a discussion on Zope3-Users list about specifying
>an encoding of the PageTemplateFile like this:
>
> template="tempalte.pt"
> encoding="utf-8"
> ...
>/>
The encoding of a page template is an intrinsic prope
Tim Peters wrote at 2005-7-7 15:03 -0400:
> ...
[Dieter]
>> However, there is an additional reason not to put "None" into a BTree.
>>
>> Its interface has a weekness in its "keys", "values", "min" and "max"
>> methods.
>>
>> E.g. in "keys(min,max)", "min=None" or "max=None" mean: no restriction.
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-7-7 06:55 -0400:
> ...
[Martijn]
>> The following sequence I think leads to trouble:
>>
>>
>> value = getattr(object, self.field_name, None)
>> if value is None:
>> return None
>>
>> as this means attributes that do exist and have the value No
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-6-17 18:43 -0400:
> ...
>If people don't actually care about ids, you could generate them
>randomly.
And the ZCatalog uses a scheme (choose random starting point in
a thread, then allocate sequentially until a conflict occurs),
which is supposed to work very well with BTre
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-5-30 08:42 -0400:
> ...
>I suggest we generalize this a bit. I suggest that the ObjectModified
>event could accept one or more modification descriptions (hints?).
>Some examples:
>
> ObjectModifiedEvent(obj, IObjectFile)
>
>This says that we modified the objects file dat
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-5-27 10:45 -0400:
> ...
>> You cannot make text extraction cheap (as it handles potentially large
>> data).
>
>You can't make it cheap in all applications. For most applications,
>text extraction and comparison is very cheap.
>
>I'm guessing that you are refering to indexi
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-5-27 08:29 -0400:
> ...
>> Then, we probably do something wrong...
>
>That's always a possibility. I think what we are doing is
>pretty reasonable. Perhaps you have other suggestions.
I think we need more control over what modifications trigger
what reindexing events.
I
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-5-26 14:43 -0400:
> ...
> Probably the indexes that we *most* want to avoid reindexing are
> text indexes. We have a ISearchableText interface that we
> commonly adapt objects to to get the text to index. We really
> can't predict how this text is computed.
Then,
Uwe Oestermeier wrote at 2005-5-11 11:18 +0200:
> ... indexing performance ...
>I agree, but perhaps we can find a compromise that fits
>all needs. I propose to use pluggable modification utilities.
>
>The container related events are already fired by only two
>functions (setitem and uncontained)
Garrett Smith wrote at 2005-5-9 12:35 -0500:
> ...
>I'd be concerned about making ObjectModifiedEvent too burdensome for
>developers. For most, cases, it's sufficient to just say "this object
>has changed" and be done with it.
But many developers are interested in efficiency.
As soon as you index
Ivo van der Wijk wrote at 2005-5-8 11:34 +0200:
>I'm currently playing with a Workflow/Catalog mix, trying to index
>workflow states (so I can simply search for published content - a
>common usecase in CMF).
>
>However, it appears that workflow statechanges do not trigger
>IObjectModifiedEvent, to
Jim Fulton wrote at 2005-4-6 08:47 -0400:
> ...
>Thoughts?
What about the rule "explicit is better than implicit"?
Does it make that much difference whether you specify the interface
explicitly or can omit it based on some elaborate algorithm?
--
Dieter
_
101 - 179 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
