Re: [Zope3-dev] Zope 3 as a reliable platform?!?
Christian Theune wrote: But changing APIs is what we do, and what we probably have to do, and probably keep doing. I would prefer to see as much of this as possible turned into the past tense... Yup. But it isn't, yet. Unfortunately. Yes, but how much of this is by necessity and how much is choice? When do we change the policy from make it nicer to make it stable? 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
[Zope3-dev] pydoc troubles
i have a small problem using pydoc to look at the Zope3 source, namely zope.proxy and modules where zope.proxy is included: running pydoc2.4 zope.proxy or pydoc2.4 zope.proxy._zope_proxy_proxy from the shell yields problem in zope.component - ImportError: /path/to/Zope3/src/zope/proxy/_zope_proxy_proxy.so: undefined symbol: PyUnicodeUCS2_AsEncodedString Thanks for your hints Michael -- http://zope.org/Members/d2m http://planetzope.org ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Zope 3.2 maintenance
Hi! Recently I started to use formlib in Zope 2. The current stable release of Zope 3 is shipped with Zope 2.9, so I thought I would use actively maintained code. But I stumbled over some rough edges in zope.formlib and zope.app.form and started to wonder if I'm the first person who tries to use some specific features. So I decided to work on some fixes. But surprise! Many issues are already fixed on the 3.3 branch and trunk. Here is a small list of fixes that were never backported to the current stable branch: http://svn.zope.org/?rev=41043view=rev http://svn.zope.org/?rev=66579view=rev http://svn.zope.org/?rev=68157view=rev http://svn.zope.org/?rev=69760view=rev Are there good reasons why these changes were not backported? I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's no general solution for keeping the current stable branch maintained. Cheers, Yuppie ___ 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: Re: Zope 3 as a reliable platform?!?
On 9/8/06, Dario Lopez-Kästen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lennart Regebro said the following on 09/07/2006 05:50 PM: On 9/7/06, Rocky Burt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My experience so far... after not having touched a project for over a year and than the client wanting some work done, they usually expect to have to pay to have it upgraded. Well, in any case, they SHOULD expect that. Yes, but we're not talkng about migrating from zope 2.6 to 3.3. We are talking about people experiencing issues between 3.x to 3.3 here. Zope 3.3 is not a major new release with deeply incompatible changes from 3.1, at least not if you look at the version numbers. If it was then it perhaps it should have been versioned as 3.5 or even 4.0, marking the impact on existing code obvious. For both developers and customers. I think customers expect not to pay a lot of money for migrating from 3.1 to 3.3 for instance. No matter how long the period of time between those releases were (this is an example, of course) Well What is a lot. Migrating software from 3.1 to 3.3 shouldn't take much more than a day or so, since the incompatibilities should be mostly BBB marked. Once you have figured out how do move one specific API use or ZCML statement changing the reast of the same type is quick. I think this is (or should be) a non-issue. The problem with the changes, as mentioned before, is that it makes it hard to support more than two versions of Zope at once. So the problem is if you have one customer on Zope 3.1 and another on 3.3, using the same software, and the 3.1 guys refuse to let you upgrade. That's the problem. :-) -- Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/ CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.org/ ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: pydoc troubles
Michael Haubenwallner wrote: i have a small problem using pydoc to look at the Zope3 source, namely zope.proxy and modules where zope.proxy is included: running pydoc2.4 zope.proxy or pydoc2.4 zope.proxy._zope_proxy_proxy from the shell yields problem in zope.component - ImportError: /path/to/Zope3/src/zope/proxy/_zope_proxy_proxy.so: undefined symbol: PyUnicodeUCS2_AsEncodedString Sorry, my fault -- its been different python versions that created the problem (thanks to baijum for pointing this out in IRC), i should have looked closer. Anyway, using the right paths i get back to where i initially started: the package information is not displayed for several packages pydoc displays package information on zope.proxy, zope.component, zope.interface for example like this: - Help on package zope.component in zope: zope.component = module 'zope.component' from '/path/to/Zope3/src/zope/component/__init__.pyc' - I'd really like to make Zope3 code look good and complete from pydoc. Thanks for your hints again Michael -- http://zope.org/Members/d2m http://planetzope.org ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7533 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7533 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux tlotze
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux tlotze. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7533 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Zope 3.2 maintenance
yuppie wrote: [snip] I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's no general solution for keeping the current stable branch maintained. I think you bring up a very good point. Of course this also implies new Zope 2 release which include bugfix releases of Zope 3.2. It needs to become very clear who the point of contact is for maintenance issues, and some guidelines about backporting bugfixes might also be useful. In the Zope 2 world it's clear it's Andreas Jung, but unfortunately it's a bit more difficult in the Zope 3 world at this point in time. With the start of the Zope Foundation we also have the opportunity to consider such issues. Jim will shortly start a discussion concerning the Zope Management Organisation. Perhaps we can come up with something concerning maintainership and maintenance policy that we all like. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7534 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 Windows 2000 zc-bbwin3
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Windows 2000 zc-bbwin3. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7533 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7534 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux zc-buildbot. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7538 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 FreeBSD tmiddleton. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7538 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux tlotze
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Linux tlotze. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7538 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] buildbot failure in Zope3 trunk 2.4 Windows 2000 zc-bbwin3
The Buildbot has detected a failed build of Zope3 trunk 2.4 Windows 2000 zc-bbwin3. Buildbot URL: http://buildbot.zope.org/ Build Reason: changes Build Source Stamp: 7538 Blamelist: flox BUILD FAILED: failed test_2 sincerely, -The Buildbot ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Zope3-dev] Zope 3 as a reliable platform?!?
Hi, Chris Withers wrote: Christian Theune wrote: But changing APIs is what we do, and what we probably have to do, and probably keep doing. I would prefer to see as much of this as possible turned into the past tense... Yup. But it isn't, yet. Unfortunately. Yes, but how much of this is by necessity and how much is choice? When do we change the policy from make it nicer to make it stable? I kind of had the impression that switching to make it stable is the tenor of this thread. Christian -- gocept gmbh co. kg - forsterstraße 29 - 06112 halle/saale - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 - fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development signature.asc Description: OpenPGP 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] pydoc troubles
On Friday 08 September 2006 03:13, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: i have a small problem using pydoc to look at the Zope3 source, namely zope.proxy and modules where zope.proxy is included: Why would you use pydoc? Any conventional documentation tools are useless in Zope 3, because they do not take interfaces and component registrations into account. Instead, I would be really happy, if people would keep developing APIDOC, which serves much better for Zope 3. 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] Zope 3.2 maintenance
On Friday 08 September 2006 04:12, yuppie wrote: Are there good reasons why these changes were not backported? I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's no general solution for keeping the current stable branch maintained. The short answer is: We are a bit sloppy. I always develop against the trunk, so when I fix an issue, I do not event think about porting it back to another release, other when one is imminent, like Zope 3.3 now. I think most other Zope 3 developers are the same. Overall, I would really like to find a person for each release being responsible for backporting bug fixes. It would be a relatively easy way to contribute to Zope 3. 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
[Zope3-dev] Re: pydoc troubles
Stephan Richter wrote: On Friday 08 September 2006 03:13, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: i have a small problem using pydoc to look at the Zope3 source, namely zope.proxy and modules where zope.proxy is included: Why would you use pydoc? Any conventional documentation tools are useless in Zope 3, because they do not take interfaces and component registrations into account. Instead, I would be really happy, if people would keep developing APIDOC, which serves much better for Zope 3. I don't think conventional documentation are completely useless. APIDoc won't always be around for zope.* software, especially when that software is distributed separately. I see a need developer docs for them. Of course, we could make APIDoc a lot less zope.app dependent and also support a static output. The online browsing via ++apidoc++ would then just be sugar. Of course, that'd take a lot of resources (which we aren't likely to have) and it always sems a good idea to at least *allow* third party software to work with Zope. 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: pydoc troubles
On Friday 08 September 2006 09:03, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Of course, that'd take a lot of resources (which we aren't likely to have) and it always sems a good idea to at least *allow* third party software to work with Zope. The API in apidoc is developed in a way that it supports other output formats. I tried to cleanly separate, information extraction, information combination, representation atoms and full representation. I imagine that you could easily build an interface to pydoc using apidoc. If the entire apidoc package is too much overhead, then the pacakge could be split to support those simpler cases. 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
[Zope3-dev] Re: Zope 3.2 maintenance
Hi Stephan! Stephan Richter wrote: On Friday 08 September 2006 04:12, yuppie wrote: Are there good reasons why these changes were not backported? I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's no general solution for keeping the current stable branch maintained. The short answer is: We are a bit sloppy. I always develop against the trunk, so when I fix an issue, I do not event think about porting it back to another release, other when one is imminent, like Zope 3.3 now. I think most other Zope 3 developers are the same. I just re-read http://www.zope.org/DevHome/Subversion/ZopeDevelopmentProcess - the only relevant document I was able to find. Some of the fixes I'm missing on the 3.2 branch were checked in after creating the 3.3 branch. The policy described in ZopeDevelopmentProcess doesn't require backports to 3.2 after the new branch was created. Overall, I would really like to find a person for each release being responsible for backporting bug fixes. It would be a relatively easy way to contribute to Zope 3. IMHO maintaining the current stable branch should be the responsibility of all developers - if you fix a bug you should be familiar with the issue and best qualified for backporting the fix. But if this is resolved in a different way I'm fine with it - as long as the problem is resolved. Dot-zero releases always contain new bugs introduced by new features. It is important to have always one stable branch that is actively maintained. Anyway. Should I just go ahead with backporting fixes or should I wait until a procedure and responsible person are found? Regards, Yuppie ___ 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 3.2 maintenance
On Friday 08 September 2006 10:15, yuppie wrote: Anyway. Should I just go ahead with backporting fixes or should I wait until a procedure and responsible person are found? I think think it would be great, if you do the backports. 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
[Zope3-dev] Re: pydoc troubles
Michael Haubenwallner wrote: Anyway, using the right paths i get back to where i initially started: the package information is not displayed for several packages pydoc displays package information on zope.proxy, zope.component, zope.interface for example like this: - Help on package zope.component in zope: zope.component = module 'zope.component' from '/path/to/Zope3/src/zope/component/__init__.pyc' - I'd really like to make Zope3 code look good and complete from pydoc. Actually what makes pydoc display this instead of the package listing is an AttributeError thrown: AttributeError: 'Provides' object has no attribute '__name__' Adding the name attribute to zope.interface.declarations.Provides makes the Exception go away and renders the pydoc docs correctly. I wonder if this is the right way to go or if the __name__ attribute was omitted by design. Thanks for looking into this Michael -- http://zope.org/Members/d2m http://planetzope.org ___ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Zope3-dev] Re: pydoc troubles
Stephan Richter wrote: On Friday 08 September 2006 09:03, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote: Of course, that'd take a lot of resources (which we aren't likely to have) and it always sems a good idea to at least *allow* third party software to work with Zope. The API in apidoc is developed in a way that it supports other output formats. I tried to cleanly separate, information extraction, information combination, representation atoms and full representation. I imagine that you could easily build an interface to pydoc using apidoc. If the entire apidoc package is too much overhead, then the pacakge could be split to support those simpler cases. Apidoc provides the same information as pydoc, in a different layout and structured at different levels. Even more, apidoc adds interface and adapter information due to the runtime wiring. Apidoc is limited to the browser and a running zope instance (or a static copy) atm. Pydoc can be used from the shell, to write to a file, from the python interpreter, from inside the zope debugger and through the browser (running its own HTTP server). Apidoc provides more information, while pydoc provides more ways to use it. Michael -- http://zope.org/Members/d2m http://planetzope.org ___ 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 3.2 maintenance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stephan Richter wrote: On Friday 08 September 2006 04:12, yuppie wrote: Are there good reasons why these changes were not backported? I volunteer to backport some fixes I'm missing in Zope 3.2, but that's no general solution for keeping the current stable branch maintained. The short answer is: We are a bit sloppy. I always develop against the trunk, so when I fix an issue, I do not event think about porting it back to another release, other when one is imminent, like Zope 3.3 now. I think most other Zope 3 developers are the same. I consider this practice unacceptable for work on an allegedly ready-for-production package. The Zope Development Process document [1] states: When you check in a bug fix, you almost always need to: * Check in the fix on the current release branch * Note the fix in the /doc/CHANGES.txt on the current release branch * Merge the fix to the trunk to be sure its fixed for the next feature release Only feature work should be done primarily on the trunk. [1] http://www.zope.org/DevHome/Subversion/ZopeDevelopmentProcess Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 202-558-7113 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFAbKx+gerLs4ltQ4RAt6SAJ9fYC0322cIzW0NeHMe+EGT+RSqsgCdHH7T t2Um2o27+28g6mMLDZiI5XU= =l+RS -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] Re: Zope 3.2 maintenance
--On 8. September 2006 14:13:05 -0400 Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When you check in a bug fix, you almost always need to: * Check in the fix on the current release branch branches(!). For Zope 2 we actually maintain 2.10, 2.9 and still a bit 2.8. -aj pgp2jdg3pXfMa.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
