On 15 October 2010 11:49, Marius Gedminas <mar...@gedmin.as> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 07:19:17PM +0200, Jan-Jaap Driessen wrote: >> The httplib.HTTPConnection API changed from python2.6 to python2.7. >> These changes are reflected in the handleErrors property of >> zope.testbrowser.browser.Browser - it is no longer possible to pass a >> boolean into the request headers. A fix is available on the trunk of >> zope.testbrowser . In this implementation, a boolean is provided to >> the consumers of the testbrowser API and a string is used in the >> request headers. > > That seems sane. > >> This implementation is sub-optimal in my opinion. > > Why?
In my opinion, the booleanness of handling errors in the testbrowser is expressed more elegantly by the presence/absence of a request header than by converting a 'true'/'false' string to a boolean (and reverse). As Wolfgang however pointed out, the double negative in the alternative solution is -1. >> In the branch >> 'janjaapdriessen-handle-errors'  you will find a cleaner >> implementation, where the switch to handle_errors is controlled by the >> presence of a "zope-do-not-handle-errors" header. The value of the >> header is no longer interpreted. This change is backwards >> incompatible. > > In what way? This header is an internal zope.testbrowser implementation > detail, isn't it? Or do things like z3c.testbrowser also use it? As far as I know it is an implementation detail. > I'm -1 for breaking backwards compatibility. > >> Code relying on the 'x-zope-handle-errors' header will >> break. I have tested this implementation against the ZTK trunk on >> python2.7 and have found no breakage of this kind. > > It's times like this when I want to have a full checkout of everything > in svn.zope.org (or, better yet, a search page on the web). > > Grepping in my shared buildout egg cache, I see that > 'x-zope-handle-errors' appears in zope.testbrowser only. I have also not found the x-zope-handle-errors in my local eggs. > It is documented in the README as an API between testbrowser and the > server it's testing, so I'm inclined to prefer the first, > backwards-compatible solution. > Conclusion: with the -1*-1*-1 of Wolfgang and the -1 of Marius, I will choose the first option. Thank you for your feedback, -- Jan-Jaap Driessen _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )