Re: [Zope-dev] brain.getObject and traversal
Florent Guillaume wrote: Well of course no, but I never had to check a getObject() against Unauthorized. Maybe it's because I only use it in a CMF setting where unaccessible objects are filtered anyway. Maybe, but CMF isn't the only use of Zope ;-) OTOH you're a bit excessive in your Whole array of possible distinct errors. Not really. I want to know the difference between: - unauthorized: my object has problems and probably needs its permissions fixing - not found: I want to know why an object is indexed that doesn't exist and fix that - other random error: damn, big problems with catalog, need to post to lists In all three cases, knowing the type of error and getting a sensible traceback in my logs is infinitely more useful than a random... AttributeError: None has no attribute x ...error at some point in the future, which may be no-where near the actual catalog search. cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] brain.getObject and traversal
Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unauthorized in getObject is out of the question, that would be new behaviour. Well, in 2.8, new behaviour is expected, right? I really passionately believe that we should not be returnining None in Zope 2.8, and since 2.8 hasn't quite hit beta yet I'm very keen to see it fixed asap. Any objections? I'm ok for 2.8. I'll look at it. Is everyone ok with returning - the object if it can be accessed - raise Unauthorized if it can't be accessed - raise NotFound if it's not there and never return None ? I'll change that before tomorrow, for 2.8a2. (I'll change NotFound in Traversal.py to a real exception instead of a string too, I thought we'd killed those.) Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: Andreas Jung wrote: I am planning to make the release tomorrow (Saturday afternoon (German time :-)). So please make your final fixes very soon or cry out loud STOP if there are any show stoppers. I'd really like to see http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1460 resolved before the release: 1.) AFAICS this bug is easy to fix. 2.) It makes at least CMFDefault sites unusable, deterring CMF users from testing Zope 2.8. I could merge the fix from the 2.7 branch myself, but I hate to check in code I don't understand completely. Maybe Tres or Jim can have a look at this? Or at least review the checkin if I do it myself? Jim and I fixed this last week: http://svn.zope.org/Zope/?rev=29712sortby=dateview=rev I will resolve the issue. Tres - -- === Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zope Corporation Zope Dealers http://www.zope.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCTWYcGqWXf00rNCgRAmJ7AJ9Z9pwnCROMi52HPj/Zu/PCrP6Z7gCfYpOy js/ESXDFYzn4mdoiLKiXGz4= =q4fr -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: brain.getObject and traversal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Florent Guillaume wrote: Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unauthorized in getObject is out of the question, that would be new behaviour. Well, in 2.8, new behaviour is expected, right? I really passionately believe that we should not be returnining None in Zope 2.8, and since 2.8 hasn't quite hit beta yet I'm very keen to see it fixed asap. Any objections? I'm ok for 2.8. I'll look at it. Is everyone ok with returning - the object if it can be accessed - raise Unauthorized if it can't be accessed - raise NotFound if it's not there and never return None ? I'll change that before tomorrow, for 2.8a2. (I'll change NotFound in Traversal.py to a real exception instead of a string too, I thought we'd killed those.) We really need to follow a deprecation-style model here: the risk of breaking major third party components is pretty high. Could we use a module-scope global, settable from zope.conf, to indicate which strategy to use? It should (for 2.8) default to raising, but we need to be prepared for an onslaught of breakage reports. The CHANGELOG should highlight the change, and include the zope.conf snippet required to restore the old behavior. We could add a deprecation warning (if that entry is activated), that the old-style option would be removed in 2.10. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zope Corporation Zope Dealers http://www.zope.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCTWhlGqWXf00rNCgRAsZ8AKChKf3YvASZ1jmJGeeN4Y3PN9/0rACbBRgi nGNOyVocQywRINr8FnyNTHg= =cUAs -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] post publishing hook
I really could use a post publishing hook. Standard use case: delay indexing at the end of the request to only do it once per object even if the object has been modified 4 times. Today there's the REQUEST._hold() hack with an instance having a __del__, but this gets executed outside the main transaction, and REQUEST is already dying. I'd like a post-publishing hook that's called in the initial REQUEST and transaction. Open issues are: 1. what if there's an exception in the hook? I'd say log it but that's all. 2. what if there's a Conflicterror? That's tougher to deal with... The transaction has to be retried, without the user being aware of it, so it means the hook should probably be called *before* things are sent to the browser. What do you think? Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] post publishing hook
When do you think it should be called? I just had to override zpublisher_validated_hook to do some stuff that would have been a bit easier if a different hook existed, but that might be a different use case... On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 10:48, Florent Guillaume wrote: I really could use a post publishing hook. Standard use case: delay indexing at the end of the request to only do it once per object even if the object has been modified 4 times. Today there's the REQUEST._hold() hack with an instance having a __del__, but this gets executed outside the main transaction, and REQUEST is already dying. I'd like a post-publishing hook that's called in the initial REQUEST and transaction. Open issues are: 1. what if there's an exception in the hook? I'd say log it but that's all. 2. what if there's a Conflicterror? That's tougher to deal with... The transaction has to be retried, without the user being aware of it, so it means the hook should probably be called *before* things are sent to the browser. What do you think? Florent ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] post publishing hook
Chris McDonough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When do you think it should be called? I should have answered that clearly: I'd put it in ZPublisher.publish, like this: result=mapply(object, request.args, request, call_object,1, missing_name, dont_publish_class, request, bind=1) # INSERT HOOK CALL HERE if result is not response: response.setBody(result) # OR MAYBE HERE but above is probably better if transactions_manager: transactions_manager.commit() Florent I just had to override zpublisher_validated_hook to do some stuff that would have been a bit easier if a different hook existed, but that might be a different use case... On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 10:48, Florent Guillaume wrote: I really could use a post publishing hook. Standard use case: delay indexing at the end of the request to only do it once per object even if the object has been modified 4 times. Today there's the REQUEST._hold() hack with an instance having a __del__, but this gets executed outside the main transaction, and REQUEST is already dying. I'd like a post-publishing hook that's called in the initial REQUEST and transaction. Open issues are: 1. what if there's an exception in the hook? I'd say log it but that's all. 2. what if there's a Conflicterror? That's tougher to deal with... The transaction has to be retried, without the user being aware of it, so it means the hook should probably be called *before* things are sent to the browser. What do you think? Florent ___ 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 ) -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: post publishing hook
Florent Guillaume wrote: I really could use a post publishing hook. Standard use case: delay indexing at the end of the request to only do it once per object even if the object has been modified 4 times. Using a post publishing hook for this use case isn't a good idea - IMO. The Publisher has nothing to with indexing. It's a completly different part of the architecture. You want to bind some actions to the transaction system because you want to execute some code at the end of the first phase of the 2 phase commit. That's a completly different story than the post publishing hook. Hooking into the transaction machinery of ZODB is very easy. Write your own DateManager implementing the IDateManager interface and register it into the current transaction using get_transaction.register(DM). For your use case overwrite the tpc_vote() method of the data manager to do the indexing at the boundary between the two phases. Jens Vagenpohl's mail host and Chris McD's blob have example code for you. Christian ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: brain.getObject and traversal
Max M wrote at 2005-3-31 14:48 +0200: ... Most of my queries, where I need to wake up objects, has the form:: brains = catalog(portal_type='Document') objects = [] for brain in brains: try: obj = brain.getObject() if not obj is None: objects.append(obj) except: pass So it will not break any of my code, and I guess that most do something similar. Hopefully not: try: ... except: ... is a powerful receipe to hide problems and to get low quality code. They should be used *very* rarely... -- Dieter ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] brain.getObject and traversal
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2005-4-1 13:21 +0200: Florent Guillaume [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unauthorized in getObject is out of the question, that would be new behaviour. Well, in 2.8, new behaviour is expected, right? I really passionately believe that we should not be returnining None in Zope 2.8, and since 2.8 hasn't quite hit beta yet I'm very keen to see it fixed asap. Any objections? I'm ok for 2.8. I'll look at it. Is everyone ok with returning - the object if it can be accessed - raise Unauthorized if it can't be accessed - raise NotFound if it's not there and never return None ? Remapping exceptions is a bad idea. Usually, valuable information is lost in the process. If you change the returning None, then you should let through whatever exception is caused. -- Dieter ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: ZPT: defer expression fix
Christian Heimes wrote: * DeferWrapper didn't cache the result of the expression like ordinary vars do. This was intended, though you couldn't know that since I never documented this. Consider the following terrible example: div tal:define=xis defer:string:x is $x p tal:repeat=x python:range(3) tal:content=xis/p /div This should evaluate to: div px is 0/p px is 1/p px is 2/p /div Why?? I don't remember why I wanted this behavior; it was an experiment, and I can't find any code of mine that uses it. Cheers, Evan @ 4-am ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 yuppie wrote: Tres Seaver wrote: I'd really like to see http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1460 resolved before the release: 1.) AFAICS this bug is easy to fix. 2.) It makes at least CMFDefault sites unusable, deterring CMF users from testing Zope 2.8. I could merge the fix from the 2.7 branch myself, but I hate to check in code I don't understand completely. Maybe Tres or Jim can have a look at this? Or at least review the checkin if I do it myself? Jim and I fixed this last week: http://svn.zope.org/Zope/?rev=29712sortby=dateview=rev I will resolve the issue. Can't confirm that. I'm afraid you fixed something different. At least the changes in ZopeGuards.py didn't make it into the trunk and I see still the same errors. Please test it yourself with the small script in Entry #1 of http://www.zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1460 or with a CMF 1.5/HEAD CMFDefault site. Please try the patch I just checked in: http://svn.zope.org/Zope/?rev=29821sortby=dateview=rev There may be additional issues (e.g., Stuart Bishop's checked __getitem__ use case), but this makes the test script and the CMF work for me. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zope Corporation Zope Dealers http://www.zope.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCTdtEGqWXf00rNCgRAreSAJ4joVm4DHkIk5uBj6nEGqtH1jza4wCgjYf4 bfHieizFRq1pejtLWQaiN3I= =d3ni -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....
[Tim Peters] ... All the substantive changes I needed to make were completed last night, and the overnight test runs were successful. I still need to write up ZODB NEWS, fiddle the version numbers, make a 3.4a1 release tag, and edit the svn:externals in Zope trunk to point at that tag. That's all very low risk, so just assume it's been done if I don't say anything else later. Still, explicit is better than implicit: that's all been done, are there are no remaining ZODB issues holding up release of Zope 2.8a2. ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: post publishing hook
Christian Heimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Florent Guillaume wrote: I really could use a post publishing hook. Standard use case: delay indexing at the end of the request to only do it once per object even if the object has been modified 4 times. Using a post publishing hook for this use case isn't a good idea - IMO. The Publisher has nothing to with indexing. It's a completly different part of the architecture. You want to bind some actions to the transaction system because you want to execute some code at the end of the first phase of the 2 phase commit. That's a completly different story than the post publishing hook. Hooking into the transaction machinery of ZODB is very easy. Write your own DateManager implementing the IDateManager interface and register it into the current transaction using get_transaction.register(DM). [note: s/IDateManager/IDataManager/ above] For your use case overwrite the tpc_vote() method of the data manager to do the indexing at the boundary between the two phases. Jens Vagenpohl's mail host and Chris McD's blob have example code for you. Ok, Tres also recommended something like that. I was a bit concerned that there would be problems in case of conflicts, or if there was a need to tweak the body returned to the user, but after reading transaction's code and MailDropHost and re-re-reading Publisher.py, I'm confident I can do everything I need. Thanks a lot, this together with events will make things much easier in our framework. Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Re: brain.getObject and traversal
Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is everyone ok with returning - the object if it can be accessed - raise Unauthorized if it can't be accessed - raise NotFound if it's not there and never return None ? I'll change that before tomorrow, for 2.8a2. (I'll change NotFound in Traversal.py to a real exception instead of a string too, I thought we'd killed those.) We really need to follow a deprecation-style model here: the risk of breaking major third party components is pretty high. Could we use a module-scope global, settable from zope.conf, to indicate which strategy to use? It should (for 2.8) default to raising, but we need to be prepared for an onslaught of breakage reports. The CHANGELOG should highlight the change, and include the zope.conf snippet required to restore the old behavior. We could add a deprecation warning (if that entry is activated), that the old-style option would be removed in 2.10. Ok, thanks a lot to Tres for having gone ahead and done that. I just merged his branch. All 5645 tests pass (man, with Zope 3 included that's way more than before!) Florent -- Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France) CTO, Director of RD +33 1 40 33 71 59 http://nuxeo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope2.8a2] ...to be released by tomorrow....
--On Freitag, 1. April 2005 18:44 Uhr -0500 Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Tim Peters] ... All the substantive changes I needed to make were completed last night, and the overnight test runs were successful. I still need to write up ZODB NEWS, fiddle the version numbers, make a 3.4a1 release tag, and edit the svn:externals in Zope trunk to point at that tag. That's all very low risk, so just assume it's been done if I don't say anything else later. Still, explicit is better than implicit: that's all been done, are there are no remaining ZODB issues holding up release of Zope 2.8a2. Excellent! Thanks, Andreas pgpIUdc1BkvOR.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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 )
