[Zope-dev] Context priority as an alternative to configuration directive overrides
I always found configuration overrides (e.g. ZCML's includeOverrides directive) to be difficult to manage and hard to get right. How about an alternative where you can put a priority on a configuration context like so: adapter zcml:priority=100 ... / Default priority would be 0, traditional overrides get the maximum priority. ZTK components might then all be at the default priority, making it trivial to add a preferred component in a custom setup. If accompagnied by a sane amount of logging output, this system might facilitate plugging in components for the rest of us. \malthe ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Context priority as an alternative to configuration directive overrides
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Malthe Borch mbo...@gmail.com wrote: I always found configuration overrides (e.g. ZCML's includeOverrides directive) to be difficult to manage and hard to get right. How about an alternative where you can put a priority on a configuration context like so: adapter zcml:priority=100 ... / I appreciate the flexibility inherent in that approach, but personally, I'd be frightened of such a system. I sometimes have problems figuring out which directives are active in the current system, if I had to reason about dozens of priority levels I think it'd be worse. If accompagnied by a sane amount of logging output, this system might facilitate plugging in components for the rest of us. I don't quite follow the for the rest of us part. Will you expand on that? -- Benji York ___ 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 )
[Zope-dev] Zope Tests: 63 OK, 9 Failed
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list. Period Wed Dec 1 13:00:00 2010 UTC to Thu Dec 2 13:00:00 2010 UTC. There were 72 messages: 6 from Zope Tests, 4 from buildbot at pov.lt, 19 from buildbot at winbot.zope.org, 13 from ccomb at free.fr, 30 from jdriessen at thehealthagency.com. Test failures - Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit-1.0_win-py2.5 slave-win From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:33:23 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025395.html Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zope2.13-py2.7 slave-ubuntu32 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:35:29 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025397.html Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zope2.14-py2.7 slave-ubuntu32 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:39:10 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025399.html Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit_win-py2.5 slave-win From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:45:19 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025403.html Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zope2.13-py2.7 slave-ubuntu64 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:45:25 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025404.html Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zope2.14-py2.7 slave-ubuntu64 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:48:48 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025407.html Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit-py2.7 slave-ubuntu32 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 14:14:50 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025419.html Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit-py2.7 slave-ubuntu64 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 14:19:05 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025420.html Subject: FAILED : winbot / ztk_10 py_244_win32 From: buildbot at winbot.zope.org Date: Wed Dec 1 16:03:11 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025426.html Tests passed OK --- Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zope2.13_win-py2.6 slave-win From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:10:28 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025391.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zope2.13_win-py2.7 slave-win From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:13:14 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025392.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit-1.0_win-py2.4 slave-win From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:27:19 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025393.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zope2.12-py2.6 slave-ubuntu32 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:31:37 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025394.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zope2.13-py2.6 slave-ubuntu32 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:33:30 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025396.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zope2.14-py2.6 slave-ubuntu32 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:37:23 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025398.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zope2.12-py2.6 slave-ubuntu64 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:41:54 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025400.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zope2.13-py2.6 slave-ubuntu64 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:43:38 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025401.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit-1.0_win-py2.6 slave-win From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:45:07 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025402.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit-1.0-py2.4 slave-ubuntu32 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:45:54 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025405.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zope2.14-py2.6 slave-ubuntu64 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:47:08 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025406.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit-1.0-py2.5 slave-ubuntu32 From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:52:30 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025408.html Subject: OK : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit_win-py2.6 slave-win From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com Date: Wed Dec 1 13:52:40 EST 2010 URL: http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2010-December/025409.html Subject: OK :
Re: [Zope-dev] Context priority as an alternative to configuration directive overrides
On 2 December 2010 13:34, Benji York be...@benjiyork.com wrote: I appreciate the flexibility inherent in that approach, but personally, I'd be frightened of such a system. I sometimes have problems figuring out which directives are active in the current system, if I had to reason about dozens of priority levels I think it'd be worse. I think there would in general be either no priority set or a single, non-trivial priority. It's true that priorities in general open up for some complexity (e.g. ordering ``zope.viewlet`` viewlets), but if used sparingly, I think it's a reasonable approach. I don't quite follow the for the rest of us part. Will you expand on that? As far as I understand, for a ZCML include override to work properly, you need to carefully make sure that your includes are in the exact right order and on the same level. In a system where two packages are trying to override the same component (should arguably never be the csae, but it is frequently), it can be difficult to get it right. Priorities on the other hand are absolute, globally. It's easy for anyone to see that the highest priority wins, no matter the order of inclusion. \malthe ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Context priority as an alternative to configuration directive overrides
On Thursday, December 02, 2010, Malthe Borch wrote: As far as I understand, for a ZCML include override to work properly, you need to carefully make sure that your includes are in the exact right order and on the same level. In a system where two packages are trying to override the same component (should arguably never be the csae, but it is frequently), it can be difficult to get it right. This explanation helped me to understand where you come from. I think I would be okay with the priority feature, but could we maybe limit it to the configure element? Since you can use this element anywhere and it can be nested, it should work well. Regards, Stephan -- Entrepreneur and Software Geek Google me. Zope Stephan Richter ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 3 porting sprint?
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 07:26, Ross Patterson m...@rpatterson.net wrote: Who would be interested in a sprint, when, where and how? I'd be interested in remote sprinting. I'm available now, FWIW. OK, so it's me and you then. :-) Let's talk in January about doing something and staying online at the same time during some specified period. ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Context priority as an alternative to configuration directive overrides
On 2 December 2010 14:37, Stephan Richter srich...@cosmos.phy.tufts.edu wrote: This explanation helped me to understand where you come from. I think I would be okay with the priority feature, but could we maybe limit it to the configure element? Since you can use this element anywhere and it can be nested, it should work well. That's reasonable. The priority needs to get applied to the configuration context anyway and this might (I don't recall the exact implementation) correspond to the configure element anyway. I'll try to get an implementation working. \malthe ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Zope 3 porting sprint?
On 12/2/10 5:39 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote: On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 07:26, Ross Patterson m...@rpatterson.net wrote: Who would be interested in a sprint, when, where and how? I'd be interested in remote sprinting. I'm available now, FWIW. OK, so it's me and you then. :-) Let's talk in January about doing something and staying online at the same time during some specified period. I will be at PyCon and would be up for doing some sprinting on it then, but probably can't commit time otherwise. -- David Glick Web Developer davidgl...@groundwire.org 206.286.1235x32 Groundwire: You Are Connected http://groundwire.org Online tools and strategies for the environmental movement. Sign up for Groundwire News! http://groundwire.org/email-capture Check out our 2010 Website Benchmarks Report. How do you stack up? http://groundwire.org/resources/articles/2010-website-benchmarks-report ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Context priority as an alternative to configuration directive overrides
Am 02.12.2010, 14:19 Uhr, schrieb Malthe Borch mbo...@gmail.com: As far as I understand, for a ZCML include override to work properly, you need to carefully make sure that your includes are in the exact right order and on the same level. In a system where two packages are trying to override the same component (should arguably never be the csae, but it is frequently), it can be difficult to get it right. Priorities on the other hand are absolute, globally. It's easy for anyone to see that the highest priority wins, no matter the order of inclusion. -1 on priorities - how do you resolve the case where the priorities are the same? The proposed solution introduces an additional complexity which could get even more baffling than the current one. I would much prefer a cascading/layered/subclass approach but I suspect this might not be possible with the current implementation, so I sympathise entirely with your complaint. As a developer you kind of imagine that your application layer ought to win just as your subclass wins. Can we get some kind of diamond rule? Charlie -- Charlie Clark Managing Director Clark Consulting Research German Office Helmholtzstr. 20 Düsseldorf D- 40215 Tel: +49-211-600-3657 Mobile: +49-178-782-6226 ___ 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 )
Re: [Zope-dev] Context priority as an alternative to configuration directive overrides
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/02/2010 03:43 PM, Charlie Clark wrote: Am 02.12.2010, 14:19 Uhr, schrieb Malthe Borch mbo...@gmail.com: As far as I understand, for a ZCML include override to work properly, you need to carefully make sure that your includes are in the exact right order and on the same level. In a system where two packages are trying to override the same component (should arguably never be the csae, but it is frequently), it can be difficult to get it right. Priorities on the other hand are absolute, globally. It's easy for anyone to see that the highest priority wins, no matter the order of inclusion. -1 on priorities - how do you resolve the case where the priorities are the same? The proposed solution introduces an additional complexity which could get even more baffling than the current one. I would much prefer a cascading/layered/subclass approach but I suspect this might not be possible with the current implementation, so I sympathise entirely with your complaint. As a developer you kind of imagine that your application layer ought to win just as your subclass wins. Can we get some kind of diamond rule? I'm -100 on priorities as well. I'm not quite sure I understand the issue: the person who should win is the one configuring the outermost layer (the site, rather than any soi-disant reusable policy shipped with a library). No ZCML shipped as part of a library should *ever* contain an includeOverrides element, period. One library writer arrogating the right to override another library writer's ZCML is insane. We need to give up on the idea that we can solve the reusable policy problem with more machinery: the correct first-order solution is to create local copies and fix them up by hand (the second-order solution is to quit shipping so much mandatory ZCML in our packages). Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkz4HCUACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ5kGACgrWlvc9XBldb8B//wBn2FMcQC MIEAoMbraokLM4Dz8wqxumaGJ3kvdypR =yP08 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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 )
