Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-18 Thread Dieter Maurer
Paul Winkler wrote at 2006-1-17 15:52 -0500:
 ...
 An alternative would be a persistent subobject of the synchronized
 object (such that its modification does not modify the
 bobobase_modification_time of the primary object).

That's not good: unless i find a suitable core zope class to use,
if the user ever uninstalls ZSyncer, all of his objects are broken!

Maybe, a PersistantMapping?

in general, i don't like to pile more data onto the poor user's
unsuspecting objects. I have done it, i just don't like it :-)

Zope3 makes it a strategy (-- annotations),
CMF uses it a lot (-- WorkflowState, Discussability, ...)



-- 
Dieter
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-17 Thread Dieter Maurer
Paul Winkler wrote at 2006-1-16 14:32 -0500:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 07:48:45PM +0100, Dieter Maurer wrote:
 Synchronization modifies bobobase_modification_time on the target.

Yep.
 
 A safe method to check whether you have a current state is to
 register the bobobase_modification_time (on source and target)
 that resulted from the synchronization.
 A resynchronization is necessary when the bobobase_modification_time
 moved away from the registered sync_bobobase_times.

Ahhh, now I see. Thank you, this is probably cheaper than
most of my ideas.
I could store that info in a BTree of some flavor.

An alternative would be a persistent subobject of the synchronized
object (such that its modification does not modify the
bobobase_modification_time of the primary object).


I just notice that synchronization of structured (e.g. ObjectManager)
objects might be a problem. As subobjects might also be synchronizable,
they, too, should get the correct times.

-- 
Dieter
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-17 Thread Paul Winkler
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 07:13:53PM +0100, Dieter Maurer wrote:
 Paul Winkler wrote at 2006-1-16 14:32 -0500:
 On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 07:48:45PM +0100, Dieter Maurer wrote:
  Synchronization modifies bobobase_modification_time on the target.
 
 Yep.
  
  A safe method to check whether you have a current state is to
  register the bobobase_modification_time (on source and target)
  that resulted from the synchronization.
  A resynchronization is necessary when the bobobase_modification_time
  moved away from the registered sync_bobobase_times.
 
 Ahhh, now I see. Thank you, this is probably cheaper than
 most of my ideas.
 I could store that info in a BTree of some flavor.
 
 An alternative would be a persistent subobject of the synchronized
 object (such that its modification does not modify the
 bobobase_modification_time of the primary object).

That's not good: unless i find a suitable core zope class to use,
if the user ever uninstalls ZSyncer, all of his objects are broken!

in general, i don't like to pile more data onto the poor user's
unsuspecting objects. I have done it, i just don't like it :-)
 
 I just notice that synchronization of structured (e.g. ObjectManager)
 objects might be a problem. As subobjects might also be synchronizable,
 they, too, should get the correct times.

Ugh, yes, that's a problem.
 
-- 

Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-16 Thread Dieter Maurer
Paul Winkler wrote at 2006-1-15 17:28 -0500:
 ...
 Yes.  These are limitations of comparing objects that have only
 a bobobase_modification_time timestamp.
 See ZSyncer/README.txt, in the Usage section.
 
 Solving this problem is hard. See ZSyncer/TODO.txt.
 
 You should remember the synchronized bobobase_modification_times
 (this may cost an additional (small) request).

I'm sorry, I can't seem to understand what you mean.

Synchronization modifies bobobase_modification_time on the target.

A safe method to check whether you have a current state is to
register the bobobase_modification_time (on source and target)
that resulted from the synchronization.
A resynchronization is necessary when the bobobase_modification_time
moved away from the registered sync_bobobase_times.

-- 
Dieter
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-16 Thread Paul Winkler
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 07:48:45PM +0100, Dieter Maurer wrote:
 Synchronization modifies bobobase_modification_time on the target.

Yep.
 
 A safe method to check whether you have a current state is to
 register the bobobase_modification_time (on source and target)
 that resulted from the synchronization.
 A resynchronization is necessary when the bobobase_modification_time
 moved away from the registered sync_bobobase_times.

Ahhh, now I see. Thank you, this is probably cheaper than
most of my ideas.
I could store that info in a BTree of some flavor.

-- 

Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-15 Thread Dieter Maurer
Paul Winkler wrote at 2006-1-14 15:30 -0500:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 09:08:26PM -0600, Carlos de la Guardia wrote:
 we just installed Zsyncer 0.7.1-beta1 on a couple of our servers and have
 run into some problems with page template synchronization. Some items that
 have different time stamps on the server and on the development machines
 show on th sync screen as synchronized even when they are different. Then if 
 we do a 'get' from the client, it fetches the file but the objects now
 appear as unsynchronized! 

Yes.  These are limitations of comparing objects that have only
a bobobase_modification_time timestamp.
See ZSyncer/README.txt, in the Usage section.

Solving this problem is hard. See ZSyncer/TODO.txt.

You should remember the synchronized bobobase_modification_times
(this may cost an additional (small) request).



-- 
Dieter
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-15 Thread Paul Winkler
On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 09:24:35PM +0100, Dieter Maurer wrote:
 Paul Winkler wrote at 2006-1-14 15:30 -0500:
 On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 09:08:26PM -0600, Carlos de la Guardia wrote:
  we just installed Zsyncer 0.7.1-beta1 on a couple of our servers and have
  run into some problems with page template synchronization. Some items that
  have different time stamps on the server and on the development machines
  show on th sync screen as synchronized even when they are different. Then 
  if 
  we do a 'get' from the client, it fetches the file but the objects now
  appear as unsynchronized! 
 
 Yes.  These are limitations of comparing objects that have only
 a bobobase_modification_time timestamp.
 See ZSyncer/README.txt, in the Usage section.
 
 Solving this problem is hard. See ZSyncer/TODO.txt.
 
 You should remember the synchronized bobobase_modification_times
 (this may cost an additional (small) request).

I'm sorry, I can't seem to understand what you mean.
 
-- 

Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-14 Thread Paul Winkler
On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 09:08:26PM -0600, Carlos de la Guardia wrote:
 Hi,
 
 we just installed Zsyncer 0.7.1-beta1 on a couple of our servers and have
 run into some problems with page template synchronization. Some items that
 have different time stamps on the server and on the development machines
 show on th sync screen as synchronized even when they are different. Then if 
 we do a 'get' from the client, it fetches the file but the objects now
 appear as unsynchronized! 

Yes.  These are limitations of comparing objects that have only
a bobobase_modification_time timestamp.
See ZSyncer/README.txt, in the Usage section.

Solving this problem is hard. See ZSyncer/TODO.txt.

 We are using Zope 2.8.0 on the clients (Windows)
 and Zope 2.8.4 on the server (Linux), could this be the problem?

I have no experience running clients and server on different
platforms, but I doubt that is the issue.

Do the system clocks on client and server agree?
It's best if they are as close as you can make them.

You might also try adjusting the fudge_secs value in ZSyncer/Config.py.
Read the comment describing its purpose.

-- 

Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )


Re: [Zope] ANN: ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 released

2006-01-13 Thread Carlos de la Guardia
Hi,

we just installed Zsyncer 0.7.1-beta1 on a couple of our servers and
have run into some problems with page template synchronization. Some
items that have different time stamps on the server and on the
development machines show on th sync screen as synchronized even when
they are different. Then if we do a 'get' from the client, it fetches
the file but the objects now appear as unsynchronized! We are using
Zope 2.8.0 on the clients (Windows) and Zope 2.8.4 on the server
(Linux), could this be the problem?

Thanks a lot.

Carlos de la GuardiaOn 12/22/05, Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ZSyncer 0.7.1-beta1 ReleasedZSyncer is a Zope 2 product that allows you to synchronize and compareobjects from one zope (source) to another (destination). It is a lotmore convenient than the old manual export / transfer / import
procedure.Version 0.7.1-beta1 (2005/12/22) is available for download fromsourceforge:http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=28073
This is a beta of a minor bugfix release. The fixes are all UI-related,and thus 0.7.1 should interoperate well with 0.7.0.I encourage everybody using (or thinking of using) 0.7.0 to upgrade to
0.7.1 so we can get some feedback and get another stable release outsoon.Thanks!--Paul Winklerhttp://www.slinkp.com___
Zope maillist-Zope@zope.orghttp://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope** No cross posts or HTML encoding!**
(Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 )
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )