Now that I've had a week or so to recover from making the Zope 3
releases, I'd like to look at how we did on our first timed releases.
Of course, the releases didn't happen in December. In fact, the Zope 2
Windows release still hasn't happened.
That we were late isn't a great surprise, given th
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:36:35AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| And then there are the Windows releases. Making Zope 2 windows releases
| is very painful and there don't seem to be many people willing to help.
| We've avoided the pain for Zope 3 by being less ambitious. We let distutils
| do most o
On 1/18/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> These were some of my reactions to this first attempt at time-based releases.
> What do other folks think?
I think early January is an understandable delay, considering that
midwinter celebrations came in the way. Great work everyone!
--
Lennart
--On 18. Januar 2006 07:36:35 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In the future, if someone introduces a major change, they *must* be
committed to be available to deal with issues that arise during the
release cycle. Perhaps we need to pick different release dates to
avoid holidays.
Andreas Jung wrote:
> I think 2.9.0 is the _real_ 2.9 beta which will be widely used by ppl :-)
Isn't this always the case? :)(ie with all 2.x.0 releses)
- Rocky
--
Rocky Burt
ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com
ServerZen Hosting -- http://www.serverzenhosting.net
News About The
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 07:36:35AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| And then there are the Windows releases. Making Zope 2 windows releases
| is very painful and there don't seem to be many people willing to help.
| We've avoided the pain for Zope 3 by being less ambitious. We
Andreas Jung wrote:
...
The basic problem with the windows release is that there is currently
nobody in charge for the windows release (although Tim is again doing
working on the Windows side, ALL HAIL TIM).
I'll repeat or emphasis that the windows release process needs to
be simple enough
Andreas Jung wrote:
...
I think 2.9.0 is the _real_ 2.9 beta which will be widely used by ppl :-)
I could be wrong, but if we stick to a 6-month release cycle for feature
releases, I don't think there is going to be much appetite for bug-fix
releases, except in extreme cases, and I think it wil
--On 18. Januar 2006 10:31:03 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
...
The basic problem with the windows release is that there is currently
nobody in charge for the windows release (although Tim is again doing
working on the Windows side, ALL HAIL TIM).
I'll r
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:27:25AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| >The installers do not require much Windows expertise. In fact, they
| >require a lot of 'makefile' expertise right now, and some Inno Setup
| >expertise, not much else.
|
| Sorry, Inno Setup is a windows installation builder. I consid
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:27:25AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| >The installers do not require much Windows expertise. In fact, they
| >require a lot of 'makefile' expertise right now, and some Inno Setup
| >expertise, not much else.
|
| Sorry, Inno Setup is a windows instal
Hi,
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 13:40 -0200, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:27:25AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> | >The installers do not require much Windows expertise. In fact, they
> | >require a lot of 'makefile' expertise right now, and some Inno Setup
> | >expertise, not much el
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:45:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| People up to now have come up with systems like this that they thought were
| automated enough. That's why we don't have a 2.9 release for windows.
What about we turn that around. How would you describe a 'automated
enough' build envir
Christian Theune wrote:
...
As Tim said one day: You need to work/develop on windows on a daily
basis to be able to cut releases for it.
I'd second this for any platform actually.
This is why it is critical that the process be automated.
This is why distutils is so great, as far as it goes. I
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 04:37:12PM +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:
| >I'll repeat or emphasis that the windows release process needs to
| >be simple enough that *I* can do it.
|
| Well, that's a perfect goal :-) But my experience with doing slightly
| simple programming tasks on Windows is that Window
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:45:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| People up to now have come up with systems like this that they thought were
| automated enough. That's why we don't have a 2.9 release for windows.
What about we turn that around. How would you describe a 'auto
Hey,
First, I'd like to thank you and everyone involved in the Zope 2 and
Zope 3 releases for making this time-based release in what I consider to
be a smashing success. Thanks for all the hard work! Things were late a
bit, some things are imperfect, but we in the community are already
feeling
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
[snip OS flamewar in the bud] :)
Regards,
Martijn
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Jim Fulton wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
...
I think 2.9.0 is the _real_ 2.9 beta which will be widely used by ppl :-)
I could be wrong, but if we stick to a 6-month release cycle for feature
releases, I don't think there is going to be much appetite for bug-fix
releases, except in extreme cases,
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:24:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| >On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:45:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| >| People up to now have come up with systems like this that they thought
| >were
| >| automated enough. That's why we don't have a 2.9 release for
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
...
| As I said before, the fact that we don't have a windows release
| is proof that the process isn't automated enough.
That's not a proof that the process is not automated enough. The
transition from python2.3 to 2.4 *is* non-trivial because python
changed from distutil
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:46:33AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| ...
| >| As I said before, the fact that we don't have a windows release
| >| is proof that the process isn't automated enough.
| >
| >That's not a proof that the process is not automated enough. The
| >transitio
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:46:33AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
| Sidnei da Silva wrote:
| ...
| >| As I said before, the fact that we don't have a windows release
| >| is proof that the process isn't automated enough.
| >
| >That's not a proof that the process is not automated
I moved the proposals I made last week to the wiki. The mapping is
listed below. I have implementations for all of them and will
probably check them in tomorrow sometime barring further discussion.
I did have one qualm with the auth proposal, as I described and
implemented it. As before,
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 11:27, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> How do you assemble releases 'from releases'? I'm not sure I understand
> that. You mean make a Zope 2 release using a Zope 3 release?
I'll note that SchoolTool greatly benefits from the current release building.
We simply include all t
We should distinguish between authoring the Windows
build-the-installer code, and running that code. "Making a Zope 2
Windows release" consists of _running_ the build-the-installer code,
and is easy. It's actually easier than building a Zope 3 Windows
release: once the Python tarball, Zope 2 tar
Hi,
This is what Zope 3 prints on startup:
2006-01-19 00:47:32,059 zope.server.http (HTTP) started.
Hostname: pitonas
Port: 8080
This is what Roundup prints on startup:
Server running - connect to:
http://localhost:8917/demo/
I find Roundup's output style much mor
Marius Gedminas wrote:
What do you think about changing Zope 3 server startup messages to show
URLs instead of separate hostname/port lines?
+1
--
Benji York
Senior Software Engineer
Zope Corporation
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub
Any objections to this proposal?
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/EnhanceTracebacksInPersistentLogs
Shane
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Any objections to this proposal?
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/EnhanceTracebacksInPersistentLogs
+1
One issue though is that I want to replace ZConfig with a ZConfig format for
zcml.
(This would include making ZCML extensible to accep
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Any objections to this proposal?
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/EnhanceTracebacksInPersistentLogs
+1
I'd also vote for the tracebacks to give file names (and line numbers)
by default.
--
Benji York
Senior Software Engineer
Zope Corpor
Martijn Faassen wrote:
...
How do you assemble releases 'from releases'? I'm not sure I understand
that. You mean make a Zope 2 release using a Zope 3 release?
No, I mean using eggs. Zope should be broken into separate projects
with their own eggs. A Zope release might just be an egg with de
Stephan Richter wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 11:27, Martijn Faassen wrote:
How do you assemble releases 'from releases'? I'm not sure I understand
that. You mean make a Zope 2 release using a Zope 3 release?
I'll note that SchoolTool greatly benefits from the current release building.
On 1/18/06, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If eggs work out, as I hope they will, I'd like to stop work on
> zpkg and just use eggs.
+42
-Fred
--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
"There is no wealth but life." --John Ruskin
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:09, Jim Fulton wrote:
> > You know my position concerning the repository and the release; I'd
> > prefer them to be kept as similar as possible to simplify the release
> > process. I hope we can go in that direction. It also makes things more
> > predictable to devel
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 Zope 3 server startup messages to show
> URLs inste
Shane Hathaway wrote:
Any objections to this proposal?
http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/EnhanceTracebacksInPersistentLogs
+1
--
Dmitry Vasiliev (dima at hlabs.spb.ru)
http://hlabs.spb.ru
___
Zope3-dev mailing lis
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 04:37:41PM -0700, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Any objections to this proposal?
>
> http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/EnhanceTracebacksInPersistentLogs
+1
(I would like the test runner to use extended tracebacks as well.)
Marius Gedminas
--
Thi
38 matches
Mail list logo
