Re: [Zope-dev] Why third_party/docutils?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 And while we're talking about docutils, the delivered Reporter warning/error functions write directly to STDOUT. We have ReST functionality in Zpydoc, and we get loads and loads and loads of crap 'invalid unindent' messages streamed to STDOUT from the Zpydoc demo site. Zope is supposedly a background server, there is very little need to be doing this. Anyone for turning this down??? Alan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBwpIXCfroLk4EZpkRAgpjAJ9L49MfYuuXKEkaI2VQRfXWgJ/d1gCeIq+d wXwjrOhHMdGfvU0/HITJrZQ= =6Qnj -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Why third_party/docutils?
Please file a collector issue otherwise it might be forgotten. -aj --On Freitag, 17. Dezember 2004 19:00 Uhr +1100 Alan Milligan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 And while we're talking about docutils, the delivered Reporter warning/error functions write directly to STDOUT. We have ReST functionality in Zpydoc, and we get loads and loads and loads of crap 'invalid unindent' messages streamed to STDOUT from the Zpydoc demo site. Zope is supposedly a background server, there is very little need to be doing this. Anyone for turning this down??? Alan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBwpIXCfroLk4EZpkRAgpjAJ9L49MfYuuXKEkaI2VQRfXWgJ/d1gCeIq+d wXwjrOhHMdGfvU0/HITJrZQ= =6Qnj -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 ) ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
[Zope-dev] 2.7 and 2.8 roadmap
Hi, just wondering what the plans are for zope 2.7 and 2.8. Specifically: 1) When is the recent release of 2.7.4b2 expected to be followed up with a 'final' (or indeed another beta) release? 2) I have seen mutterings about a 2.7.5 release, but I'm not sure why this should be necessary as I thought all 'dot releases' were only supposed to provide bug-fixes. Seeing as we're still on beta for 2.7.4, shouldn't any outstanding fixes go into that? 3) Are there plans for another 2.8 (alpha or beta) release in the near future? Is there a timeline for this? Are ZC or anyone else hanging out for this? Personally, I'm pretty keen to be able to persist new style classes (for use with the email.Message.Message class). The wiki at http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.8/FrontPage seems a little out of date. Just interested. cheers, tim ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] 2.7 and 2.8 roadmap
--On Freitag, 17. Dezember 2004 12:27 Uhr + Tim Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, just wondering what the plans are for zope 2.7 and 2.8. Specifically: 1) When is the recent release of 2.7.4b2 expected to be followed up with a 'final' (or indeed another beta) release? 2.7.4 final is scheduled for early January. 2) I have seen mutterings about a 2.7.5 release, but I'm not sure why this should be necessary as I thought all 'dot releases' were only supposed to provide bug-fixes. Seeing as we're still on beta for 2.7.4, shouldn't any outstanding fixes go into that? Have you seen anything other than bugfixes in dot releases? Except some minor improvements all releases were bugfix releases only. No major new features were introduced. And new 2.7.X release will be made as long as outstanding bugs are fixed but not *every* outstanding will be fixed. 3) Are there plans for another 2.8 (alpha or beta) release in the near future? Is there a timeline for this? Are ZC or anyone else hanging out for this? Personally, I'm pretty keen to be able to persist new style classes (for use with the email.Message.Message class). The wiki at http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.8/FrontPage seems a little out of date. There are some outstanding issues that must be fixed before the next alpha 2 (ZClasses, garbage collection). I don't know when Jim can work on this issue (there are only some people with the detail knowledge to fix these issues). Since I can not enforce people to work on particular issues, a2 will released when the outstanding issues are solved. Andreas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] 2.7 and 2.8 roadmap
Andreas Jung said: 1) When is the recent release of 2.7.4b2 expected to be followed up with a 'final' (or indeed another beta) release? 2.7.4 final is scheduled for early January. Ok, thanks. 2) I have seen mutterings about a 2.7.5 release, but I'm not sure why this should be necessary as I thought all 'dot releases' were only supposed to provide bug-fixes. Seeing as we're still on beta for 2.7.4, shouldn't any outstanding fixes go into that? Have you seen anything other than bugfixes in dot releases? Except some minor improvements all releases were bugfix releases only. No major new features were introduced. And new 2.7.X release will be made as long as outstanding bugs are fixed but not *every* outstanding will be fixed. That's fair enough. Thanks for the clarification. 3) Are there plans for another 2.8 (alpha or beta) release in the near future? Is there a timeline for this? Are ZC or anyone else hanging out for this? Personally, I'm pretty keen to be able to persist new style classes (for use with the email.Message.Message class). The wiki at http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/Zope2.8/FrontPage seems a little out of date. There are some outstanding issues that must be fixed before the next alpha 2 (ZClasses, garbage collection). I don't know when Jim can work on this issue (there are only some people with the detail knowledge to fix these issues). Since I can not enforce people to work on particular issues, a2 will released when the outstanding issues are solved. I understand. FWIW, the two things I'd like are a stable 2.7 release in the short term to setup a new site on, and a stable 2.8 release to develop a new product on. Sounds like Santa (aka Andreas) will be bringing the former ;-). I think in the back of my mind, I was hoping that more people waiting on 2.8 to get their features into zope might speed things up on the latter - hence my wondering about the motivations for a 2.7.5 (which you have now cleared up). That said, I'm in no position to do anything other than inquire (in a most friendly and appreciative manner) about 2.8 as I'm certainly not on of the people with the 'detailed knowledge' to fix zclasses and garbage collection. cheers, tim ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] 2.7 and 2.8 roadmap
--On Freitag, 17. Dezember 2004 13:06 Uhr + Tim Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FWIW, the two things I'd like are a stable 2.7 release in the short term to setup a new site on, and a stable 2.8 release to develop a new product on. Sounds like Santa (aka Andreas) will be bringing the former ;-). I think in the back of my mind, I was hoping that more people waiting on 2.8 to get their features into zope might speed things up on the latter - hence my wondering about the motivations for a 2.7.5 (which you have now cleared up). The latest final releases are stable enough to work with them. Since Zope is meanwhile mostly community-driven things are done as people have time and interest and willing to spend their free-time on such a project. That said, I'm in no position to do anything other than inquire (in a most friendly and appreciative manner) about 2.8 as I'm certainly not on of the people with the 'detailed knowledge' to fix zclasses and garbage collection. Andreas ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Is Zope.2.7.4 feature frozen ?
Jim Fulton wrote: Rodrigo Dias Arruda Senra wrote: Hi, is the Zope 2.7.4 feature frozen ? Huh? Zope 2.7 is feature frozen. New features need to go into 2.8. Jim Fair enough. I do understand the rationale why new features should follow major releases. However, I was lead to believe that 2.7.x was not feature frozen due to the Zope 2.7.4 beta 1 - Features added ... section in http://zope.org/Products/Zope/2.7.4b2/CHANGES.txt There is more historical evidence of added features in minor releases. Perhaps borderline cases between bug fix and new feature or just simply exceptions to the rule wink. cheers, Rod Senra ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Is Zope.2.7.4 feature frozen ?
--On Freitag, 17. September 2004 11:58 Uhr -0300 Rodrigo Dias Arruda Senra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, I was lead to believe that 2.7.x was not feature frozen due to the Zope 2.7.4 beta 1 - Features added ... section in http://zope.org/Products/Zope/2.7.4b2/CHANGES.txt These are improvements of existing functionalies but not new features. A new feature would added SOAP support or something similar but adding a knob here and there and adjusting code where it is necessary. -aj ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: Zope Service on Windows
Mark Hammond wrote: I just checked in how I finally got Zope 2.7.x to run as a service on Windows again. See also http://collector.zope.org/Zope/1533 - this has a number of changes to make services much more reliable on Windows. My patch includes your change, but along the lines of Tim's objection, mine compromises with: +os.environ[PYTHONPATH] = os.environ.get(PYTHONPATH, ) + ; + SOFTWARE_HOME My patches also have the killer feature of writing any Zope stdout to the Windows event log in the case of error - critical if you hope to see what the underlying error was. The patch also allows for Zope to be terminated gracefully (rather than unconditionally terminating it as now), re-instates support for Windows NT, and allows for a complete, functioning pywin32 build to be used (including win32com etc). Just-by-way-of-reminder ly, +1 for landing Mark's patch as a prerequisite to fixing *any* Windows-service related bug in the future. Tres. -- === Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zope Corporation Zope Dealers http://www.zope.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: Why third_party/docutils?
Andreas Jung wrote: You're still not getting the point. Z2 shipped and Z3 ships with a *stripped* down version of Docutils where only the docutils subfolder is used. Now the *whole* package is included which makes it necessary to adjust the paths. Moving this as a whole to lib/python does *not* solve the need to adjust the path using sitecustomize.py or by adding paths to runzopefriends. I don't get this. Why couldn't we just delete the *entire* stripped-down 'docutils' package and replace it with the *whole* package *in exactly the same location*? E.g. (assuming we had not already munged things): $ cd Zope-2.7-branch/lib/python/docutils $ find . -type f | grep -v CVS | xargs cvs rm -f $ cvs commit -m - Blow away stripped down docutils. $ tar xzf /tmp/docutils-the-whole-enchilada.tar.gz $ find . -type f | grep -v CVS | xargs cvs add $ cvs commit -m - Add current docutils. What would break (or would have broken) had we done that? Another option would be to remove the 'docutils' directory *in the CVS repository and replace it with a symlink to the canonical vendor import. Docutils should be kept *somewhere* as a *whole* which makes updating much easier. Moving the package to lib/python does *not* solve Stefans problem which is maybe only a problem on Stefan's side (I don't know). The problem is that having to munge sitecustomize.py or the PYTHONPATH in order to get 'lib/python/thirdparty' included messes up *lots* of things. I would appreciate it if people in the community could come up with reasonable proposals and ideas how to solve problems instead of fighting against solutions being made. Especially the Z2 community is currently in a state where there is much talking and crying of people about Z2 issues that sux or must be resolved but there is really only a small, small of people really doing something substantial work. So looking back at this issue: the solution is working except for Stefan and if there is a problem anyone should suggest a reasonable problem or just fix the original problem (maintainability of Docutils) in a better way than I did. Otherwise we should keep it as it is or revert to an older version that has not the problems. But in this case I won't care about Docutils in future versions. The solution is *not* working; it addes complexity and brittleness, for little gain that anybody else can see. Jim has already pointed this fact out, and asked for an explanation of the rationale. Let's work out something which: - allows us to use the canonical version of docutils - doesn't impose unneeded restrictions on how people configure the Python with which they run Zope. Tres. -- === Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zope Corporation Zope Dealers http://www.zope.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: Why third_party/docutils?
Andreas Jung wrote: --On Freitag, 17. Dezember 2004 11:34 Uhr -0500 Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I don't get this. Why couldn't we just delete the *entire* stripped-down 'docutils' package and replace it with the *whole* package *in exactly the same location*? E.g. (assuming we had not already munged things): $ cd Zope-2.7-branch/lib/python/docutils $ find . -type f | grep -v CVS | xargs cvs rm -f $ cvs commit -m - Blow away stripped down docutils. $ tar xzf /tmp/docutils-the-whole-enchilada.tar.gz $ find . -type f | grep -v CVS | xargs cvs add $ cvs commit -m - Add current docutils. If you unpack Docutils as a whole in lib/python then you will a structure lib/python/docutils/docutils ^^ This is the directed where docutils import usually start. If you do adjust sys.path to lib/python/docutils/docutils then every code that tries to import the docutils package will fail because it tries to import from lib/python/docutils instead from lib/python/docutils/docutils. I don't know why this is so hard to understand or are we talking about different things? OK, then suppose we vendor import the docutils tarball into a different location, e.g.: $ cd /tmp $ tar xzf docutils-the-whole-enchilada.tar.gz $ cd dodcutils $ cvs -d :ext:cvs.zope.org:/cvs-repository import \ Libraries/docutils docutils docutils-0_xxx and then symlink the actual package portion in the CVS repository into Zope/lib/python? For SVN, we would spell that somewhat differently, but the idea would be the same. The major goal is to remove the need to jigger either the Python search path or the sitecustmize.py package; both of those practices step on territory which is intended to belong to the system admin, rather than the software. Tres. -- === Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zope Corporation Zope Dealers http://www.zope.com ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: Zope Service on Windows
[Mark Hammond] See also http://collector.zope.org/Zope/1533 - this has a number of changes to make services much more reliable on Windows. My patch includes your change, but along the lines of Tim's objection, mine compromises with: +os.environ[PYTHONPATH] = os.environ.get(PYTHONPATH, ) + ; + SOFTWARE_HOME My patches also have the killer feature of writing any Zope stdout to the Windows event log in the case of error - critical if you hope to see what the underlying error was. The patch also allows for Zope to be terminated gracefully (rather than unconditionally terminating it as now), re-instates support for Windows NT, and allows for a complete, functioning pywin32 build to be used (including win32com etc). Just-by-way-of-reminder ly, [Tres Seaver] +1 for landing Mark's patch as a prerequisite to fixing *any* Windows-service related bug in the future. I think we should call now the future. Windows services were broken completely by the sitecustomize.py fiddling, and remain in a hackish state. Christian, Mark wrote the book (literally) on managing Windows services from Python, and wrote all the win32all support code Zope has relied on forever to get Windows services working at all. If it's at all possible to apply his patches, please do so -- they address several long-standing problems Zope suffers on Windows, and nobody on Earth is better qualified to fix them than Mark. ___ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 )
