[Zope3-dev] StabilizeEggPackages wiki page
Hi Theune, I updated instructions here: http://wiki.zope.org/zope3/StabilizeEggPackages . Can you please review it ? Regards, Baiju M ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Release process closure
On 4 Oct 2007, at 00:59 , Jim Fulton wrote: On Oct 3, 2007, at 3:44 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: I'd really like to get to closure on the current approved release process. Philipp, would you mind separating the release process into a separate file? Or do you mind if I do it? Done: http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/ releasing-software.txt Cool. I think you can delete 5b. You already update the date, as you should, on the trunk or branch. You want the actual release date to be part of the change log, so it has to be entered before making the tag. Done. I think we need to split "d" into: d) "Create a source release" e) Test the source release. At a minimum, rerun the package tests using the source release. (I really need to add a buildout option to help with this.) So how would I do this? This feels a bit complicated: 1. Create a source distribution with:: $ python setup.py sdist 2. Extract the tarball:: $ tar xzf dist/foo.package-X.Y.tgz 3. Edit buildout.cfg to make the result of the tarball a develop egg *instead* of the stuff in 'src':: [buildout] develop = foo.package-X.Y 4. Rerun the buildout:: $ bin/buildout 5. Run the tests:: $ bin/test f) If the package has extensions, make and test a windows egg. (You may need to get someone with the needed Windows tools to help you with this. :) f) Upload the release(s) to PyPI ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Release process closure
On Oct 4, 2007, at 9:25 AM, Baiju M wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: On Oct 4, 2007, at 6:51 AM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > On 4 Oct 2007, at 00:59 , Jim Fulton wrote: >> On Oct 3, 2007, at 3:44 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: >> >>> Jim Fulton wrote: I'd really like to get to closure on the current approved release process. Philipp, would you mind separating the release process into a separate file? Or do you mind if I do it? >>> >>> Done: >>> http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/ releasing-software.txt >>> >> >> Cool. I think you can delete 5b. You already update the date, >> as you should, on the trunk or branch. You want the actual >> release date to be part of the change log, so it has to be >> entered before making the tag. > > Done. > >> I think we need to split "d" into: >> >> d) "Create a source release" >> >> e) Test the source release. At a minimum, rerun the package tests >> using the source release. (I really need to add a buildout option >> to help with this.) > > So how would I do this? This feels a bit complicated: > > 1. Create a source distribution with:: > > $ python setup.py sdist > > 2. Extract the tarball:: > > $ tar xzf dist/foo.package-X.Y.tgz > > 3. Edit buildout.cfg to make the result of the tarball a develop > egg *instead* of the stuff in 'src':: > > [buildout] develop = foo.package-X.Y > > 4. Rerun the buildout:: > > $ bin/buildout > > 5. Run the tests:: > > $ bin/test No. :) Currently, you could: - Create the source distro. (Note that I always use sparkling clean Pythons, so the command you give doesn't work for me as setuptools isn't importable. I always use: bin/buildout setup . sdist Why you cannot install setuptools ? It's not that I cannot. I *will* not. I like my Python to be shiny sparkly clean. My Python is what I get after running configure, make, make-install. Period. My site- packages is empty. IMO, this is the only sane way to develop. Also, I get very very very cranky when someone wastes my time with a problem that is ultimately traced to crap installed in their Python that isn't part of a standard install. Very cranky. I'm feeling cranky just thinking about it. :) Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Splitting 'Signals' into an egg?
Not sure what Zope 3 is using these days (haven't checked), but Zope 2 had a 'Signals' package that handled signaling events on both Windows and *nix in a somewhat transparent way. Has anyone thought of packaging that as an egg? -- Sidnei da Silva Enfold Systemshttp://enfoldsystems.com Fax +1 832 201 8856 Office +1 713 942 2377 Ext 214 ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
Jim Fulton wrote: Any objections? This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. +1 What about retiring #zope3-dev IRC channel and only using #zope ? Regards, Baiju M ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Release process closure
Jim Fulton wrote: On Oct 4, 2007, at 6:51 AM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > On 4 Oct 2007, at 00:59 , Jim Fulton wrote: >> On Oct 3, 2007, at 3:44 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: >> >>> Jim Fulton wrote: I'd really like to get to closure on the current approved release process. Philipp, would you mind separating the release process into a separate file? Or do you mind if I do it? >>> >>> Done: >>> http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/releasing-software.txt >>> >> >> Cool. I think you can delete 5b. You already update the date, >> as you should, on the trunk or branch. You want the actual >> release date to be part of the change log, so it has to be >> entered before making the tag. > > Done. > >> I think we need to split "d" into: >> >> d) "Create a source release" >> >> e) Test the source release. At a minimum, rerun the package tests >> using the source release. (I really need to add a buildout option >> to help with this.) > > So how would I do this? This feels a bit complicated: > > 1. Create a source distribution with:: > > $ python setup.py sdist > > 2. Extract the tarball:: > > $ tar xzf dist/foo.package-X.Y.tgz > > 3. Edit buildout.cfg to make the result of the tarball a develop > egg *instead* of the stuff in 'src':: > > [buildout] develop = foo.package-X.Y > > 4. Rerun the buildout:: > > $ bin/buildout > > 5. Run the tests:: > > $ bin/test No. :) Currently, you could: - Create the source distro. (Note that I always use sparkling clean Pythons, so the command you give doesn't work for me as setuptools isn't importable. I always use: bin/buildout setup . sdist Why you cannot install setuptools ? Regards, Baiju M ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Release process closure
On Oct 4, 2007, at 6:51 AM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: On 4 Oct 2007, at 00:59 , Jim Fulton wrote: On Oct 3, 2007, at 3:44 PM, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: I'd really like to get to closure on the current approved release process. Philipp, would you mind separating the release process into a separate file? Or do you mind if I do it? Done: http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/ releasing-software.txt Cool. I think you can delete 5b. You already update the date, as you should, on the trunk or branch. You want the actual release date to be part of the change log, so it has to be entered before making the tag. Done. I think we need to split "d" into: d) "Create a source release" e) Test the source release. At a minimum, rerun the package tests using the source release. (I really need to add a buildout option to help with this.) So how would I do this? This feels a bit complicated: 1. Create a source distribution with:: $ python setup.py sdist 2. Extract the tarball:: $ tar xzf dist/foo.package-X.Y.tgz 3. Edit buildout.cfg to make the result of the tarball a develop egg *instead* of the stuff in 'src':: [buildout] develop = foo.package-X.Y 4. Rerun the buildout:: $ bin/buildout 5. Run the tests:: $ bin/test No. :) Currently, you could: - Create the source distro. (Note that I always use sparkling clean Pythons, so the command you give doesn't work for me as setuptools isn't importable. I always use: bin/buildout setup . sdist - Add your dist directory to the list of find links - Specify the new version in your requirements - remove the develop entry - run the buildout - run the tests As I said, buildout could automate this in the future. Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
Jim Fulton wrote: This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. +100 -- http://worldcookery.com -- Professional Zope documentation and training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
Any objections? This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] WSGI2
There's work going on to create a second version of WSGI. Last time, we didn't pay much attention until WSGI was a done deal. This time, I think it would be better if we were involved earlier. Unfortunately, I don't have time to pay attention. Does anyone else? Jim P.S. I'd lobe to avoid typos. Especially in subject lines. :/ -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] I'd love to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
On Oct 4, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Baiju M wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Any objections? This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. +1 What about retiring #zope3-dev IRC channel and only using #zope ? I though of that. Historically, the #zope channel was much chattier, which makes it hard for me to deal with. When #zope3-dev was set up, I asked that people keep the noise level down, which has made it much more useful, imo. Maybe we should keep these issues separate for now. Jim -- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 19:32 +0530, Baiju M wrote: > Jim Fulton wrote: > > > > Any objections? > > > > This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving > > zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. > > +1 > > What about retiring #zope3-dev IRC channel and only using #zope ? No. #zope is roughly the equivalent of the main zope list. There is no #zope-dev channel. Now, someone might suggest that the zope3-users list should be merged with the main zope list, but that someone wouldn't be me. At least not as long as there are separate releases being made. - Michael Bernstein signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
On 10/4/07, Michael R. Bernstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving > > > zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. > > > > +1 +1 > > What about retiring #zope3-dev IRC channel and only using #zope ? > > No. #zope is roughly the equivalent of the main zope list. There is no > #zope-dev channel. Renaming #zope3-dev to #zope-dev would make sense to me though. -- Lennart Regebro: Zope and Plone consulting. http://www.colliberty.com/ +33 661 58 14 64 ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: Release process closure
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 09:44:21PM +0200, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: > Jim Fulton wrote: >> I'd really like to get to closure on the current approved release process. >> Philipp, would you mind separating the release process into a separate >> file? Or do you mind if I do it? > > Done: > http://svn.zope.org/*checkout*/Sandbox/philikon/foundation/releasing-software.txt Isn't step 4 redundant? I assume "the changelog" refers to CHANGES.txt in step 2: 2. Update the changelog to note the release date. Make sure the changelog is complete. <...> 4. Fill in the release date in ``CHANGES.txt``. Step 6.3: "python setup.py register sdist upload", should we assume that everyone will have a fixed version of setuptools installed, or should we recommend that people making the sdist on Windows system force the package format to tar.gz to avoid the unpleasantness with \r\n line endings in SOURCES.txt causing some files to not get extracted on POSIX systems? Purely formatting matter: the indentation of step 6 is inconsistent: 6. Get a separate checkout of the release tag for creating the distribution tarball and eggs. It is important that you don't do this on the trunk or release branch to avoid In the checkout of the tag perform the following steps: <...> Also, there are two steps numbered 6: 6. Back on the trunk or the release branch, increase the version number in ``setup.py`` to the *next* release while preserving the <...> Marius Gedminas -- Never attribute to malloc that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. -- From the .sig of [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Pommnitz) signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
On Thursday 04 October 2007 09:57, Jim Fulton wrote: > This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving > zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. -1. I do not follow zope-dev at all and the traffic is pretty high there. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
--On 4. Oktober 2007 15:15:40 -0400 Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thursday 04 October 2007 09:57, Jim Fulton wrote: This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. -1. I do not follow zope-dev at all and the traffic is pretty high there. Not as high as on the zope3-dev list. +1 for phasing the "zope3" term out. -aj pgpxQcMv4o99u.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: Are pagelets content providers?
Roger Ineichen wrote: > What do you recommend to do? I'm open to improve it but how can we reflect > the different adaption concepts like we have with the different __init__ > used by IPagelet and IContentProvider. It should be easy to do by using a factory function which is registered as the multiadapter to IContentProvider. It would take the context, request, and view as arguments, instantiate a pagelet passing only the context and request as constructor parameters, and finally set its view attribute. > I agree that __init__ is not a part of the interface. But I also think it > should be a part of a (probably another) interface since this is required > by a specific lookup pattern. No. __init__ is not part of any interface. It is a matter of implementation. IMO, if there are to be different ways to construct instances providing the same interface, there ought to be different factories producing such instances depending on context and chosen implementation (class). A class itself is just another one of those factories. > Ok, I see your idea :o) -- Thomas ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
Michael R. Bernstein wrote: On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 19:32 +0530, Baiju M wrote: Jim Fulton wrote: Any objections? This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. +1 What about retiring #zope3-dev IRC channel and only using #zope ? No. #zope is roughly the equivalent of the main zope list. There is no #zope-dev channel. Now, someone might suggest that the zope3-users list should be merged with the main zope list, but that someone wouldn't be me. At least not as long as there are separate releases being made. In Plone, we have a -user and -dev list, and a single chatroom, #plone. We do have #plone-framework for the framework team and release manager, but this is much quieter and everyone who's in #plone-framework is also in #plone. Obviously, this is about preference, but we find that having everyone in the same chatroom helps keep people in touch. Reading multiple mailing lists is not so hard - paying attention to multiple chatrooms at once is, and a -user room is pretty much useless if there are no experienced developers paying attention. Also, on the subject of renaming things: Calling it zope-devel or similar may not be ideal, since people who develop with Zope (don't we all?) assume this is for any developers, not just core developers. Something like zope-general and zope-coredev may be better. Martin -- Acquisition is a jealous mistress ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
Stephan Richter wrote: On Thursday 04 October 2007 09:57, Jim Fulton wrote: This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. -1. I do not follow zope-dev at all and the traffic is pretty high there. If you "do not follow it at all", how would you know that "the traffic is pretty high there"? It is, in fact, much lower than on zope3-dev. Here's an overview of the number of messages in both lists in the last 12 months (cross-posts are counted twice): zope-dev zope3-dev Oct 158238 Nov 119235 Dec65231 Jan 168300 Feb 127178 Mar 164300 Apr 118282 May89297 Jun 121126 Jul52274 Aug91303 Sep 101411 So zope3-dev has anything between 1.5 and 5 times the number of postings per month than zope-dev. If you're not interested in certain topics, then I suggest you simply ignore those emails. -- http://worldcookery.com -- Professional Zope documentation and training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] I'd lobe to merge the zope3-dev and zope-dev lists
Martin Aspeli wrote: Stephan Richter wrote: On Thursday 04 October 2007 09:57, Jim Fulton wrote: This would basically involve retiring the zope3-dev list and moving zope3 developers to the zope-dev list. -1. I do not follow zope-dev at all and the traffic is pretty high there. But pretty low there, if you take out the cross-posts. :) ... and the automatic test runner which reports at least once a day. I thought we agreed to remove it from this list and move it elsewhere? -- http://worldcookery.com -- Professional Zope documentation and training ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
