Tim Peters wrote:
[Tim Peters]
...

get_transaction() is more troublesome than _just_ that, alas:  there
are about 160 instances of it across the stitched-in lib/python/zope,
and Products/Five, code.  This causes lots of new deprecation warnings
when running the tests.  These are easy to repair with 1-2 hours easy
editing work, but again Zope trunk doesn't own the lib/python/zope
code (where almost all of these appear).


[Martijn Faassen]

Right, lib/python/zope is actually Zope X3.0.0, and we didn't expect
we'd need to *update* Zope X3.0 in order for it to work with Zope 2.8.

I know. That's why I pushed and pushed to get the branch merged "early" -- I knew _something_ would go wrong, I just didn't know what <wink>.

But it isn't going wrong, as ZODB 3.4 is there yet, right? :) We only find out because you tried it on some other branch? I'm not clear on where this went on...


[snip]

Suggestion:  I make a new copy of

Zope3/tags/ZopeX3-3.0.0-Zope-2.8-pr1/src/zope

If we're going to go that route, no need to make a copy, just use the branch that's already there for exactly this purpose:


http://svn.zope.org/Zope3/branches/ZopeX3-3.0.0-Zope-2.8/

and make a new -pr2 or -integration2 or whatever you like tag out of it when you're done.

stitch that into Zope trunk (change the lib/python svn:externals to
point to the new copy), do all the get_transaction() edits there, and
repair the IDataManager glitch there too.  This could easily be done
before lunch today (my time <wink>).

Just stitch back in the /branches/ZopeX3-3.0.0-Zope-2.8, and fix that, and then, when you're done, copy it to a new tag and update the external to that.


If people are agreeable, help me pick a name for the new copy; I have
no idea what the "pr1" is supposed to mean in the current name, but
would like to stick to whatever naming convention is in use there.

Right, pr1 is out of date. What about?

Zope3/tags/ZopeX3-3.0.0-Zope-2.8-i2

for 'integration 2'? :)

[snip]
Alternatively, we could make a branch for use in 2.8.  I don't
think this would really be a problem.

Above, I'm volunteering to do the latter. Somehow I get the impression that sticking an unplanned X3.0.1 release on the critical path for Zope 2.8 wouldn't go over well here <wink>.

Geez, that's true, thanks. :) I'm too addled today to even yammer about it a lot.


Regards,

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

Reply via email to