Tres Seaver wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
Hi,
perhaps the sun burned too long on my brain today but I investigated
some options for replacing DateTime with Python's datetime module. Zope
3 uses datetime and we all know that the DateTime implementation sucks.
Especially the timezone implementation has a bunch of problems (count
the bugtracker issues related to timezone errors).
Constraints:
We can not get rid of the DateTime class and its API for backward
compatibility reasons.
Idea:
The DateTime class remains in place and uses an instance attribute to
represent the original value of a DateTime object as instance of
datetime. Calls to the old DateTime API are proxied to corresponding
calls of the datetime API (or emulated)
Efforts so far:
I have some quick-and-dirty implementation that can construct the
datetime instance directly within the DateTime constructor and when
loading an object from the ZODB (using a custom __setstate__()
implementation...could be used for an on-the-fly migration). This seems
to work properly. For timezone related issues I am using pytz. However
there is a problem with using pytz: the timezone names supported by
pytz are sometimes different from the standard one. E.g. 'GMT+0400' is
represented in pytz as '/Etc/GMT+0400'...however that seems to be
solvable.
Before digging deeper I would like to hear some opinions if this seems a
reasonable approach? Unlikely that we can achieve 100% backward
compatibility but possibly 99%....thoughts...comments?
I'm generally in favor of this, but only if we eggify the *current*
DateTime implementation such that people who rely on the incompatible
behavior can specify the older version.
Jup, but eggification would likely be the last (and possibly the most easy)
step :-)
Eggifying the current package shouldn't be hard (it has no dependencies
except for zope.interface. In fact, it looks as though Philipp has done
it already:
Yup. Behold:
* http://svn.zope.org/DateTime/trunk/
It's currently pulling in the source through an external, but I see no
reason why it can't be moved in its own project area. Stuff like
DateTime is going to have lots of fixes for already running
applications (like timezone fixes, etc.), so having it keep its own
release cycle makes sense to me, especially when it's now being
evolved towards datetime. The rest of the eggs I created (Acquisition,
ExtensionClass, etc.) are mostly independend of the rest of Zope 2 as
well and could gain their own projects just as well. Not a full-scale
explosion, but just some factoring out...
* http://download.zope.org/distribution/DateTime-2.11.0a1.dev-r76287.tar.gz
http://download.zope.org/distribution/DateTime-2.11.0a1.dev_r76287-py2.4.egg
A ready to go egg of DateTime, completely independent from Zope 2
(only dependencies are zope.interface and zope.testing I believe).
--
http://worldcookery.com -- Professional Zope documentation and training
_______________________________________________
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 )
