[ Florent Guillaume wrote:]
Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
recently i came up here with the intention to fix DateTime#strftime().
while trying this, i had to dig deeper and deeper into the
implementation
of DateTime and especially the timezone and daylight saving stuff.
to be honest, it's
On 11/22/05, Jürgen Herrmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
do we REALLY need dates 1900 / 2036 ?
Yes.
using unix timestamps for
storage and as the base for all conversions would make things a lot
easier!
datetimes are picklable, so if you are going to change how they are
stored (which may not be
[ Lennart Regebro wrote:]
On 11/22/05, Jürgen Herrmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
do we REALLY need dates 1900 / 2036 ?
Yes.
using unix timestamps for
storage and as the base for all conversions would make things a lot
easier!
datetimes are picklable, so if you are going to change how
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
[ Florent Guillaume wrote:]
Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
recently i came up here with the intention to fix DateTime#strftime().
while trying this, i had to dig deeper and deeper into the
implementation
of DateTime and especially
On 11/22/05, Jürgen Herrmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i'll surely change the storage format, when rewriting it!
So you plan on having some version marker, or so, which
tells which storage format is used?
//Curious.
--
Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/
CPS Content Management
[ Lennart Regebro wrote:]
On 11/22/05, Jürgen Herrmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i'll surely change the storage format, when rewriting it!
So you plan on having some version marker, or so, which
tells which storage format is used?
//Curious.
basicall i thought about having a dateime
Hello all,
I'm responsible of a server (Debian Sarge) which has been put behind a firewall!
I am strugling with proxy problems. For instance, CMFSin doesn't seem to work
(for syndication slots in Plone), and LDAPUserFolder cannot reach an external
ldap server.
On the system itself, I have
Hi
My zopeinstance went down and I was getting an 'upstream server' unknown message from apache. On restarting zope from ./zopectl this was the message I got.
unlinking stale socket
/home/zopeinstance/var/zopectl/sock,sleep/
No handlers could be found for logger 'root'
Does anyone have any
Note that Zope likely started. Did it? Did you try zopectl stop and
zopectl start again? If so, did it work?
- C
On Nov 22, 2005, at 9:52 AM, michael nt milne wrote:
Hi
My zopeinstance went down and I was getting an 'upstream server'
unknown message from apache. On restarting zope
Yes, I noticed that the deamon wasn't running and so re-started it. It started up fine but that was the message I received. Just wondered what happened etc..
On 11/22/05, Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that Zope likely started.Did it?Did you try zopectl stop andzopectl start
I think it probably was running after the first time you invoked it.
The message is only informative, meaning that zopectl died unexpectly
the last time it was run (without cleaning up after itself). It's
not a fatal error or at least hasn't been whenever I've seen it.
On Nov 22, 2005,
Ok, but Zope and Apache were serving nothing until I re-started Zope. The server had died for some reason
On 11/22/05, Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it probably was running after the first time you invoked it.The message is only informative, meaning that zopectl died unexpectly
At Tuesday 22/11/2005 05:50, Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
one more question (to the public!):
do we REALLY need dates 1900 / 2036 ? using unix timestamps for
storage and as the base for all conversions would make things a lot
easier!
Sure. What about birthdays of aged people? Long running
On 22 Nov 2005, at 15:38, Renfer Serge (EDU) wrote:
Hello all,
I'm responsible of a server (Debian Sarge) which has been put
behind a firewall!
I am strugling with proxy problems. For instance, CMFSin doesn't
seem to work (for syndication slots in Plone), and LDAPUserFolder
cannot
Yes, so something must have killed the server and shut it down leading
to the stale socket message. However I guess without further checking
through the server logs I won't find out exactly why etc.On 11/22/05, J Cameron Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:michael nt milne wrote: Ok, but Zope and
On Nov 22, 2005, at 11:27 AM, Gabriel Genellina wrote:
At Tuesday 22/11/2005 05:50, Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
one more question (to the public!):
do we REALLY need dates 1900 / 2036 ? using unix timestamps for
storage and as the base for all conversions would make things a lot
easier!
Sure.
I've encountered the issue described here:
http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope/2005-August/161120.html
on a recently upgraded Zope using LocalFS. I have tracked
down the issue to the fact that the object that LocalFS
hands to ZODB is a WrapperObject, and this object does
not have an oid. This
Jürgen Herrmann wrote at 2005-11-21 10:33 +0100:
... difficult to understand timezone handling ...
once again sry, if i raised expectations on the fix of strftime.
I am a bit astonished that you need to understand timezone handling
in order to implement an improved DateTime.strftime.
The only
George Lee wrote at 2005-11-20 12:47 -0500:
Is there much buzz about this in CMF developer land?
Apart from regular problem reports (usually in the Plone mailing list),
there are few talks about proxy roles.
--
Dieter
___
Zope maillist -
paul hendrick wrote at 2005-11-21 14:44 +:
Hi, thanks for the reply.
I did what you asked and the error log produced these messages:
Unauthorized: strongYou are not authorized to access this
resource./strongp Username and password are not correct.
Unauthorized: You are not allowed to access
Jens Vagelpohl wrote at 2005-11-20 19:01 +0100:
...
IMHO proxy roles should be used extremely sparingly, if at all. They
are a last resort and I personally never use them. Matter of fact I
believe having to use them means the application design could use
some improvement...
If something
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 part of
On 22 Nov 2005, at 20:08, Dieter Maurer wrote:
You have lost the thread's start:
George's problem has been that he could not move an object
in an *EXTERNAL METHOD*, i.e. in trusted filesystem code.
He would have the same problem in a filesystem product.
The problem is that
--On 22. November 2005 20:37:16 +0100 Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You should complain about this misfeature on zope3-dev@zope.org.
Definitely, there should not be a fixed (not configurable)
association between text/xml requests and XML-RPC
as text/xml can be interesting for the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On 22 Nov 2005, at 20:08, Dieter Maurer wrote:
You have lost the thread's start:
George's problem has been that he could not move an object
in an *EXTERNAL METHOD*, i.e. in trusted filesystem code.
He would have
Log message for revision 40315:
Collector #1954: DocumentTemplate.DT_String: remove non-XHTML wart from
error message.
Changed:
U Zope/branches/Zope-2_8-branch/doc/CHANGES.txt
U Zope/branches/Zope-2_8-branch/lib/python/DocumentTemplate/DT_String.py
-=-
Modified:
Log message for revision 40316:
Forward port fix for Collector #1954 from 2.8 branch.
Changed:
U Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/DocumentTemplate/DT_String.py
-=-
Modified: Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/DocumentTemplate/DT_String.py
Log message for revision 40317:
Forward port fix for Collector #1954 from 2.8 branch.
Changed:
U Zope/trunk/lib/python/DocumentTemplate/DT_String.py
-=-
Modified: Zope/trunk/lib/python/DocumentTemplate/DT_String.py
===
---
Log message for revision 40318:
Collector #1621: Added BBB alias for 'whrandom' in AccessControl/DTML.py and
RestrictedPython/Utilities.py.
The alias will be removed in Zope 2.10.
Collector #1894: updated docstrings, removing references to whrandom.
Changed:
U
Log message for revision 40319:
Forward port fixes for collector #1621 and #1894 from the 2.8 branch.
Changed:
U Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/AccessControl/DTML.py
U Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/DocumentTemplate/DT_Util.py
U
Log message for revision 40320:
Collector #1621, 1894: Removed support for use of long-deprecated 'whrandom'
module.
Changed:
U Zope/trunk/doc/CHANGES.txt
U Zope/trunk/lib/python/AccessControl/DTML.py
U Zope/trunk/lib/python/DocumentTemplate/DT_Util.py
U
Log message for revision 40327:
Suppress expected DeprecationWarning output in test.
Changed:
U Zope/branches/Zope-2_8-branch/doc/CHANGES.txt
U
Zope/branches/Zope-2_8-branch/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
-=-
Modified:
Log message for revision 40328:
Suppress expected DeprecationWarning output in test.
Changed:
U
Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
-=-
Modified:
Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
Log message for revision 40329:
Suppress expected DeprecationWarning output in test.
Changed:
U Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
-=-
Modified: Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
Log message for revision 40337:
Ensure we don't forget to restore sys.stderr.
Changed:
U
Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
-=-
Modified:
Zope/branches/2.9/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
Log message for revision 40338:
Ensure we don't forget to restore sys.stderr.
Changed:
U Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
-=-
Modified: Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
Alexander Limi schrieb:
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 06:56:32 -0800, Andreas Jung
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In general such changes should be made on the HEAD (for next 2.10
release).
OK. I was aiming for a quick sprint to get some small changes into 2.9
before release (ie. no actual code
--On 22. November 2005 09:11:13 +0100 Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Alexander Limi schrieb:
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 06:56:32 -0800, Andreas Jung
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In general such changes should be made on the HEAD (for next 2.10
release).
OK. I was aiming for a quick
Andreas Jung schrieb:
--On 22. November 2005 09:11:13 +0100 Tino Wildenhain
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Limi schrieb:
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 06:56:32 -0800, Andreas Jung
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In general such changes should be made on the HEAD (for next 2.10
release).
OK. I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
FWIW:
Alot. :)
$ pwd
/home/tseaver/projects/Zope-CVS/Zope-2_8-branch
$ find . -name *.py | grep -v build-base | xargs grep -l whrandom
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 08:43 -0500, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Withers wrote:
Paul Winkler wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 02:33:10PM -0200, Sidnei da Silva wrote:
I might have asked
I'd like to upgrade
bug 1950 to critical.
Is there an easy way
to do this?
___
Daniel PozmanterSiteworx,
Inc.
"Festina Lente" - Gaius
Julius
___
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
We don't have the collective time right now to market this, but it's
very cool so we thought someone might get some use out of it.
Brian Lloyd has developed zope.testrecorder, a cross-browser (IE,
Firefox, Safari) JavaScript app that records browser events (clicking,
entering text, etc.) and
Chris Withers wrote at 2005-11-21 16:33 +:
...
here's a line from one of our event logs:
2005-11-17T08:00:27 INFO(0) ZODB conflict error at /some_uri
(347 conflicts since startup at 2005-11-08T17:56:20)
What is this telling me?
It is incredibly stupid.
The message above only tells you,
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2005-11-22 00:13 +0100:
...
I'm actually not sure what's logged when a Conflict Error makes it back
to the users, offhand I don't see anything in my logs. Can someone
confirm or infirm that fact?
If nothing is logged, I'll add something at level ERROR.
I fear
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Pozmanter wrote:
I'd like to upgrade bug 1950 to critical.
Is there an easy way to do this?
I just followed up to the bug report: we need a test case, written in
Python, which demonstrates the leak.
The usual course when trying to isolate
Cool, thanks!
Jim
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
FWIW:
Alot. :)
$ pwd
/home/tseaver/projects/Zope-CVS/Zope-2_8-branch
$ find . -name *.py | grep -v build-base | xargs grep
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Pozmanter wrote:
Yes, I saw the follow up.
So is there no way to change the severity of a bug?
It could be changed, but you need to persuade us that it is a
showstopper first. Labeling the bug critical is a claim that we
have to fix it
Dan Pozmanter wrote:
Sure thing:
I was mucking around in _Acquisition.c with getattr, findattr, etc,
and I noticed checked to see if my code was leaky.
It was! I then checked just vanilla code, and found the same
leak (only much much smaller).
So here is what I did to make things more
Isn't a try: ... finally: ... needed here?
Florent
Tres Seaver wrote:
Log message for revision 40329:
Suppress expected DeprecationWarning output in test.
Changed:
U Zope/trunk/lib/python/Products/PythonScripts/tests/testPythonScript.py
-=-
Modified:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Florent Guillaume wrote:
Isn't a try: ... finally: ... needed here?
Yup. Or else call '_free_warning_output' call in 'tearDown' (which I
jsut checked in). Thanks for the catch!
Tres.
- --
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 06:47:34 -0800, Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
IMHO if this is just UI changes that improve usability it should be
OK to flout the rules a bit. The rules are there to ensure code
quality and stability in a release branch - I doubt small
On 2005-11-22 at 12:27:42 [+0100], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Though the insert is failing, a sequence column in the target table is
apparently being incremented by the failing insert. (I deduce this
from the fact that subsequent Z SQL test inserts show sequence gap
of 12 after each failed
53 matches
Mail list logo
