Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Martijn suggests to just use user. I can live with that. The reason why I didn't propose that is because I thought people still valued the abstraction of a principal as opposed to the physical person. I don't need it and all those Unix users out there don't seem to need it either... +1 on user. Actually for Russian translation I've used user anyway since I didn't find another good translation for principal. -- Dmitry Vasiliev (dima at hlabs.spb.ru) http://hlabs.spb.ru ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] A Call for Slaves
Tim Peters wrote: BTW, Microsoft no longer sells VC6. Indeed, this was my understanding... Nevertheless, does anyone know how to legally get hold of these? (Hmmm... I work in amoungst a horde of MS developers here, maybe one of them will know...) Also, how can I build both 2.3 and 2.4 stuff on one machine? I do this routinely on my boxes, but I don't know anything about the build-bot environment (which would have to be strange indeed to prevent building 2.3 and 2.4 versions on the same box). Well, how would I do it manually? cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] buildbot warnings in Zope3 trunk 2.4 remy
Benji York wrote: It's more that I'm reluctant to figure out how they've changed the system since the last public release, make the modifications, test them, produce patches, and then persuade them to accept them. All that takes time that is presently better spent on other things. Ah okay, that makes sense... Don't let me dissuade you from contributing though. :) Heh, have no fear, my own lack of time will likely do that! cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ 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: [Zope3-Users] ODBC database adapter for Zope3?
Stephan Richter wrote: Oh :-( That sucks. Is there a DBAPI sig for python that we should be talking to about getting that fixed? There is a sig and we could try. But I have *very* little hope that such a proposal would come to fruition. Most applications don't really care about supporting many DB backends. Waaagh :'( 2. Advanced DA implementations support much more datatype conversion than the default database connection package. Yes, but it's inconsistency between DAs on this front that causes problems... Well, the Python DB-API is even worse and does not even try to specify type returns. I agree, maybe we should create a recommendation for Zope 3 DB adapters. *nods* For example, a good DB adapter should always ensure that all datetimes have pytz timezones associated with them. Exactly, which is why that kind of stuff should be in a central place. What happens if a DA DOESN'T do this when someone is expecting it to? (the other common problematic type is that of an SQL NULL) Well, I would love to see a draft on a Zope 3 DA standardization. And I'd love to write one, but I still need to get to grips with the basics of Zope 3 first ;-) Gimme a poke in a month or two! cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Roger Ineichen wrote: Hi principals *shrug* I'm a user :). Since principal doesn't seem to be a common term in IT speak either, translators repeatedly have their problems with it. In German, for example, we came up with Nutzungsberechtigter which is just an arbitrary choice and doesn't even fit all aspects of principal. It's still a good choice for now because if we had chosen to literally translate it as Prinzipal, noone would even be close to understanding what we meant. Sebastien Douche seemed to have the same problem regarding the French translation, as he told us on IRC today. There just aren't good native words that translate principal well enough, let alone a good literal translation. I don't agree Principal is a common term in IT security. Since we use a principal based security system, (perhaps there are other ones) we have to use the right name for this principal. The reason you give (we use the principal concept, so we have to call it 'principal') is the most obvious one and at the same time the most unsatisfying because it doesn't justify the word itself. Maybe there are other terms for the concept? Perhaps it is helpful to describe what a principal really are. A principal object represents the security context of the user on whose behalf the code is running, including the user's identity, groups and roles to which they belong. That's a good definition, thank you. Which source are you quoting from? So, I would like to give principal a better name. How about participant? After all, a principal _participates_ in an interaction through a participation (e.g. an HTTP request). Participant should also be pretty easy to translate: it's a common word, especially outside IT vocubulary, which means chances are good to find appropriate native translations for it. No, no, a participant is not a principal. See the wfmc workflow implementation. Participants are used for participate on a process task. Participants don't even know how to login. Participants are more like a role in some use cases. I did not realize that WFMC also has the understanding of a participant. That's obviously a strong point against that word. As I've said before, I'm not locked into participant; all I wanted is my criticism to be constructive... I think there is no way to rename principal to participant since they are totaly different components. I never wanted to mix up security and WFMC concepts. I wasn't even aware of the latter. You're comparing apples and oranges here. (Note that the point of finding translations for technical terms is not only for the sake of a translated Zope 3 UI. It's more about how people understand technical terms. I think most Zope 3 developers aren't native English speakers and they do not necessarily think in English. So, good words that have good native translations help the understanding process on their end. That is not only important for _learning_ a concept, but also for _explaining_ it. As a book author, I know what I'm talking about... :)) I think you are right here. It's not easy to explain a security concept. Perhaps we have to collect some good documentation from other principal based security concept and see how they describe this part. I agree. I very much like the definition you quoted above. Apart from that, I wish we could find a good pattern for translating principal. Quoting the English term should be our last option. I wonder, for example, which term French speakers use when they *talk* to each other about principals... French is known to be very conservative when it comes to introducing English words to itself. Philipp ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: most specific interface?
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: is the order of the list of interfaces implemented by an object subject to internal changes? I have identified the need for such a pattern: iface = object.interface() with: class someObject(object): implements(IMainInterface, ISecondaryInterface, ...) def interface(): Return the most specific interface implemented by the element. return list(providedBy(self))[0] to be able in that case to get access to the first interface implemented by an object, as a sort of main object type. We usually do this differently. If some interfaces are special types (e.g. IFile is a content type) then we have this interface provide ISpecialType (e.g. IFile provides IContentType). ISpecialType is an interface extending IInterface. Then, no matter where in the list of provided interfaces the type is, it can be fetch with queryType. Let's take the IFile example from above and set it up as a content type: from zope.app.content.interfaces import IContentType from zope.app.file.interfaces import IFile from zope.interface import directlyProvides directlyProvides(IFile, IContentType) Now let's make a File object. We see that its first interface isn't IFile but IFileContent: from zope.app.file.file import File f = File() list(providedBy(f)) [InterfaceClass zope.app.publication.interfaces.IFileContent, InterfaceClass zope.app.file.interfaces.IFile, InterfaceClass persistent.interfaces.IPersistent] Yet, when we query the content type, we get IFile as expected. from zope.app.interface import queryType queryType(f, IContentType) InterfaceClass zope.app.file.interfaces.IFile the zope/app/component/registration.txt documentation mentions: We can now write another `IComponentRegistration` implementation that knows about the interface; in fact, it will pick the most specific one of the component: from zope.interface import providedBy class SomethingRegistration(Registration): ... ... def interface(self): ... return list(providedBy(self._component))[0] ... interface = property(interface) but I haven't seen it used anywhere else. Is it safe to use this? I think it's not quite safe to rely on it the way you seem to want (as a main object type). It is correct that the first interface *is* the most specific one, e.g. when it comes to adaption: from zope.component import * from zope.interface import * class IA(Interface): pass ... class IB(Interface): pass ... class IC(Interface): pass ... class Adapter(object): ... adapts(IA) ... implements(IC) ... def __init__(self, context): pass ... class Bedapter(object): ... adapts(IB) ... implements(IC) ... def __init__(self, context): pass ... provideAdapter(Adapter) provideAdapter(Bedapter) class Klass(object): ... implements(IA, IB) ... IC(Klass()) __main__.Adapter object at 0x1424e30 class Klass(object): ... implements(IB, IA) ... IC(Klass()) __main__.Bedapter object at 0x1424e10 Philipp ___ 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: Speed win in Python's urllib.quote
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Lennart Regebro wrote: On 9/12/05, Olivier Grisel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lennart Regebro wrote: This is unfortunately not a public area. But you can grab funkload from the public svn: *slaps forehead* You are right, I only saw that public in the beginning. :) Thanks. http://svn.nuxeo.org/trac/pub/file/funkload/trunk/README.txt Actually, this is public : http://public.dev.nuxeo.com/~ben/funkload/ :) J. - -- Julien Anguenot | Nuxeo RD (Paris, France) CPS Platform : http://www.cps-project.org Zope3 / ECM : http://www.z3lab.org mail: anguenot at nuxeo.com; tel: +33 (0) 6 72 57 57 66 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDJqDOGhoG8MxZ/pIRAlXhAJ9G64tbJLIO7sb8RcpwzOW0+psBwwCcDD30 FN+u0Rk5amzkvuuSsoyr6yU= =rl5l -END PGP 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] RFC: Rename principal to participant
On 9/13/05, Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps it is helpful to describe what a principal really are. A principal object represents the security context of the user on whose behalf the code is running, including the user's identity, groups and roles to which they belong. That's a good definition, thank you. Which source are you quoting from? Yes, this definition is very useful. I think you are right here. It's not easy to explain a security concept. Perhaps we have to collect some good documentation from other principal based security concept and see how they describe this part. I agree. I very much like the definition you quoted above. Apart from that, I wish we could find a good pattern for translating principal. Quoting the English term should be our last option. I wonder, for example, which term French speakers use when they *talk* to each other about principals... French is known to be very conservative when it comes to introducing English words to itself Principal is used in law, finance, education, art, social economics... All french translations aren't good for zope3. Using 'Principal' is another option but it is also a french word ('main', 'the main thing') : source of confusion. Currently, I don't know what to do. Another difficult word is credentials. -- Sébastien Douche [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] A Call for Slaves
Chris Withers wrote: Tim Peters wrote: Or you can fetch the compiled .pyds from my member page, as the current Windows build-bot slaves do (see the wget PYDs log and unzip PYDs log steps from the Windows 2000 fred-win column at http://buildbot.zope.org/). Sorry, just re-read this, now I'm lost again. I just assumed the buildbot would build these, since it's well, a build bot? The current config for Windows fetches the pre-compiled PYDs. That way you aren't required to have the compilers installed. I was just asking to test the waters about people having/installing the compilers in the future. What exactly IS the buildbot doing then? It's running the tests, that's what we're interested in. -- Benji York Senior Software Engineer 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: most specific interface?
Janko Hauser wrote: Am 13.09.2005 um 12:43 schrieb Jean-Marc Orliaguet: But where do you put the 'directlyProvides' statement? in the class : Can't this be put in the interface definition module for IContentType? You mark other interfaces with the interface IContentType. __Janko I don't know.. but the content type is just one type of categorization. I already have 3 or 4 categories that apply to a same object apart from zope's IContentType. /JM ___ 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: most specific interface?
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote: ... the idea is that you define as many categories as you need: IMetaType, ISomeCategory, IWidgetType ... and you create relations between interfaces with: directlyProvides(IFile, IContentType) Exactly. as if you had a relation tool, There are all sorts of ways of expressing relationships in Python without central databases. then every object that implements IFile (no matter in what position) will have the IFile content type? Right. Note that a content type is a specific kind of type. If an object provides interface I, then the object is said to be of type I. If I is a content type, then the object is said to have that content type. As a matter of policy, we expect an object to have a single content type and have a helper function for getting the content type by finding an object's most specifiuc type that is a content type. But where do you put the 'directlyProvides' statement? There are two options. You put it in some python module, such as the module that defines IFile: class IFile(...): ... directlyProvides(IFile, IContentType) or, since this is often a configuration choice, you put in in zcml: interface interface=.interfaces.IFile type=zope.app.content.interfaces.IContentType / Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] A Call for Slaves
[Tim Peters] BTW, Microsoft no longer sells VC6. [Chris Withers] Indeed, this was my understanding... Nevertheless, does anyone know how to legally get hold of these? (Hmmm... I work in amoungst a horde of MS developers here, maybe one of them will know...) Go to http://www.google.com and enter visual studio 6 in the search box. Pay attention to the text ads you get back after you hit ENTER. Also, how can I build both 2.3 and 2.4 stuff on one machine? I do this routinely on my boxes, but I don't know anything about the build-bot environment (which would have to be strange indeed to prevent building 2.3 and 2.4 versions on the same box). Well, how would I do it manually? How would you do what manually? Install all the versions of Python you care about on Windows, and build Zope using the version of Python you want to test with. For example, \Python23\python setup.py build_ext -i install_data --install-dir . \Python23\python test.py -v from the root of a Zope3 checkout, to test Zope3 with Python 2.3.5, assuming you installed the latest release in the Python 2.3 line and accepted the default installation directory. Use the path to a different Python if you want to use a different Python. ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Martijn suggests to just use user. I can live with that. The reason why I didn't propose that is because I thought people still valued the abstraction of a principal as opposed to the physical person. I don't need it and all those Unix users out there don't seem to need it either... Dmitry Vasiliev wrote: +1 on user. Actually for Russian translation I've used user anyway since I didn't find another good translation for principal. I'm -1 on user. In Launchpad, the concepts of User and Principal are quite different. For example, a principal that represents a particular user accessing the web application is different from the principal that represents that same user accessing Launchpad via gpg signed email. In Launchpad, request.principal is not used by the application programmers. It is used only by the authentication, authorization and publication machinery. The machinery looks up a Person (an application domain object) for the current principal (the participant, if you will) and makes this available to application code. So, application code deals with an application-level object, not some security system construct. Maybe in some simple systems it is good to conflate the concepts of user and principal. Making the principal available from the request in zope3 encourages this. But, I think that it is not good application design, and it does not make for clear abstractions. -- Steve Alexander ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
RE: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Hi Philipp Regards Roger Ineichen Projekt01 GmbH www.projekt01.ch _ END OF MESSAGE -Original Message- From: Philipp von Weitershausen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 9:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: zope3-dev@zope.org; 'Stephan Richter' Subject: Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant [...] Perhaps it is helpful to describe what a principal really are. A principal object represents the security context of the user on whose behalf the code is running, including the user's identity, groups and roles to which they belong. That's a good definition, thank you. Which source are you quoting from? Perhaps yo have to use a internet explorer for reading this ;-) http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpref/html/ frlrfsystemsecurityprincipaliprincipalclasstopic.asp Regards Roger Ineichen ___ 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: RFC: Rename principal to participant
On 9/12/05, Tonico Strasser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Philipp von Weitershausen schrieb: ... So, I would like to give principal a better name. How about participant? After all, a principal _participates_ in an interaction through a participation (e.g. an HTTP request). Participant should also be pretty easy to translate: it's a common word, especially outside IT vocubulary, which means chances are good to find appropriate native translations for it. (Note that the point of finding translations for technical terms is not only for the sake of a translated Zope 3 UI. It's more about how people understand technical terms. I think most Zope 3 developers aren't native English speakers and they do not necessarily think in English. So, good words that have good native translations help the understanding process on their end. That is not only important for _learning_ a concept, but also for _explaining_ it. As a book author, I know what I'm talking about... :)) Hope to hear some comments, Here the obligatory dumb question: why is it not called user? It might be worth considering that the term user has a mostly negative connotation in English (at least in the USA). IMO anyways, I don't have any data to back this up. -Tom ___ 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: RFC: Rename principal to participant
Tom von Schwerdtner wrote: It might be worth considering that the term user has a mostly negative connotation in English (at least in the USA). In tech circles, user is completely neutral and safe. However, in slang, sometimes drug user is shortened to user. Shane ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Steve Alexander wrote: In Launchpad, request.principal is not used by the application programmers. It is used only by the authentication, authorization and publication machinery. The machinery looks up a Person (an application domain object) for the current principal (the participant, if you will) and makes this available to application code. So, application code deals with an application-level object, not some security system construct. It sounds like you're saying only the security machinery should know about principals, and that everything else deals with users. If so, it should not be necessary for any Zope 3 developer to learn about principals unless they are writing security machinery. Is that right? Shane ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
On 9/13/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It sounds like you're saying only the security machinery should know about principals, and that everything else deals with users. If so, it should not be necessary for any Zope 3 developer to learn about principals unless they are writing security machinery. Is that right? That sounds sublimely reasonable to me. ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Shane Hathaway wrote: Steve Alexander wrote: In Launchpad, request.principal is not used by the application programmers. It is used only by the authentication, authorization and publication machinery. The machinery looks up a Person (an application domain object) for the current principal (the participant, if you will) and makes this available to application code. So, application code deals with an application-level object, not some security system construct. It sounds like you're saying only the security machinery should know about principals, and that everything else deals with users. If so, it should not be necessary for any Zope 3 developer to learn about principals unless they are writing security machinery. Is that right? You need to know about principals if you are writing security machinery, or if you are writing the thing that maps principals to whatever passes for users in your application. What typically happens is, the request contains credentials. The principal represents the fact that those credentials have been checked and found to be ones that the system knows about. It also represents the type of credentials, for example, how much you trust them. This in turn maps to the concept of a user accessing your system. credential - principal - user The Zope 3 framework can take care of the credentials and principals. The users are application-specific. A content management system for Zope 3 would have its own concept of what a user is, but still use the Zope 3 concepts and implementations of principal and credential. A room booking and timetabling system may have a different concept of a user, as a user may well be a specific instance of a content object such as a person (who is a bookable resource). -- Steve Alexander ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
RE: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
Hi Shane -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shane Hathaway Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 7:34 PM To: Steve Alexander Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant Steve Alexander wrote: In Launchpad, request.principal is not used by the application programmers. It is used only by the authentication, authorization and publication machinery. The machinery looks up a Person (an application domain object) for the current principal (the participant, if you will) and makes this available to application code. So, application code deals with an application-level object, not some security system construct. It sounds like you're saying only the security machinery should know about principals, and that everything else deals with users. If so, it should not be necessary for any Zope 3 developer to learn about principals unless they are writing security machinery. Is that right? I think so too. But I whould not try to explain a PAU (pluggable authentication utility) without to use the word principal. I think using the words user or participant for a principal in this case is not a good idea. Regards Roger Ineichen Projekt01 GmbH www.projekt01.ch _ END OF MESSAGE Shane ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/dev%40projekt01.ch ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Rename principal to participant
I think so too. But I whould not try to explain a PAU (pluggable authentication utility) without to use the word principal. I think using the words user or participant for a principal in this case is not a good idea. Perhaps the scope of the PUA can be extended to have a plug-in factory for User objects, and to make the current User easily available inside page templates and other presentation code. People who wish to use[1] the PUA would define their own User class, which could be as simple as taking the principal id, but would often be more complex according to the needs of their application. -- Steve Alexander [1] Desperately trying to avoid using the term user there. ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: RFC: Rename principal to participant
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 12:08:40PM +0200, Sebastien Douche wrote: | On 9/13/05, Philipp von Weitershausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I wonder, for | example, which term French speakers use when they *talk* to each other | about principals... French is known to be very conservative when it | comes to introducing English words to itself | | Principal is used in law, finance, education, art, social economics... | All french translations aren't good for zope3. Using 'Principal' is | another option but it is also a french word ('main', 'the main thing') | : source of confusion. Interesting. I suppose English obtained principal from French ca 1040 ad. Maybe the French are conservative about adopting English words because the English were, generally, uneducated peasants while the French were the ruling class. (then again, that probably has no relevance :-)) English has several definitions, with main or primary being one of them. I suppose that is where the others are derived from. For example, the highest-level official in a primary or secondary school is called the principal. Maybe the use of principal for security stems from the idea of a primary identity, which can be related to secondary identities (ie a user vs. the groups the user is a member of). -D -- After you install Microsoft Windows XP, you have the option to create user accounts. If you create user accounts, by default, they will have an account type of administrator with no password. -- bugtraq www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
[Zope3-dev] tiny patch to zope.server.interfaces.IStreamConsumer
Dear All, zope.server.serverchannelbase.received requires preq, an IStreamConsumer, to have a boolean attribute named `empty' that is not mentioned in the interface. A patch against the trunk (rev 38459) is attached, which adds this attribute to the interface. Thanks. Chad Whitacre P.S. I tried to file this as a bug+solution in the Z3d Issue Collector, but when I submitted the New Issue form, I was given a login screen. After several login attempts, I went through the forgotten password process, but never received an email. The only other thing I can think of is that my email address on record is bad, but I don't know how to verify or fix that. Index: src/zope/server/interfaces/__init__.py === --- src/zope/server/interfaces/__init__.py (revision 38459) +++ src/zope/server/interfaces/__init__.py (working copy) @@ -195,7 +195,10 @@ completed = Attribute( 'completed', 'Set to a true value when finished consuming data.') +empty = Attribute( +'empty', 'Set if no request was made.') + class IServer(Interface): This interface describes the basic base server. ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com