[Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Christian Theune
Hi,

I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.

As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more 
details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.

 From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices 
upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple 
orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to 
leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.

I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.

Christian

-- 
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh  co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations

___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Laurence Rowe
On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theune c...@gocept.com wrote:
 Hi,

 I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.

 As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
 details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.

  From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
 upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
 orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
 leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.

 I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.

It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it
wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to
adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various
different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer.

Laurence
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Christian Theune
Hi,

On 11/16/2011 12:24 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
 On 16 November 2011 10:30, Christian Theunec...@gocept.com  wrote:
 Hi,

 I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.

 As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
 details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.

   From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
 upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
 orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
 leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.

 I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.

 It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it
 wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to
 adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various
 different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer.

I think it was not used by Zope2 itself - however, it's a feature 
provided by the framework that applications can use. I guess there might 
be features in a framework that the framework itself doesn't make use of.

Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most 
light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.

Christian

-- 
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh  co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Martin Aspeli
On 16 November 2011 11:30, Christian Theune c...@gocept.com wrote:

 Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most
 light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.

What is this project? ;-)

Martin
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Christian Theune
On 11/16/2011 12:31 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
 On 16 November 2011 11:30, Christian Theunec...@gocept.com  wrote:

 Going down into the new ZMI project I find it to be the most
 light-weight approach without adding an extra dependency.

 What is this project? ;-)

We're currently sprinting in Berlin to explore a clean-up of the ZMI. 
We're experimenting a bit with some ideas and I'll make a write-up of 
what we found in the next days.

Technically we're investigating making a separate package that would 
allow us to remove the old cruft DTML-ZMI and replace it with a small, 
PT-based Zope4 application that runs in a separate skin.

Christian

-- 
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh  co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:24, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
 It was removed in http://zope3.pov.lt/trac/changeset/122056 because it
 wasn't actually being used anywhere. I'm not completely averse to
 adding it back, but it does create confusion with the various
 different alternatives in Zope2 like CMF skins and plone.browserlayer.

Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
confuses the heck out of me.

//Lennart
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Charlie Clark
Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com:

 Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
 confuses the heck out of me.

Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think  
we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,  
well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins  
still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out  
of the box.

Charlie
-- 
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting  Research
German Office
Kronenstr. 27a
Düsseldorf
D- 40217
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Lennart Regebro
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
 Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com:

 Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
 confuses the heck out of me.

 Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
 we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,
 well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins
 still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out
 of the box.

When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.

//Lennart
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark 
 charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
 Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro
 rege...@gmail.com:
 
 Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having
 both confuses the heck out of me.
 
 Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I
 think we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser
 layers, well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think
 that CMF Skins still offer some functionality that you don't get
 with browser layers out of the box.
 
 When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.

Note that for all their warts, they are *massively* more successful than
the Z3 reimplementation, which was overengineered (I helped with that,
I'm sure).  In particular, the exceesive amount of ZCA majyk makes
complicaterd uses of the Z3 skins very fragile (easy to misconfigure,
hard to discover what you broke).


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/

iEYEARECAAYFAk7DtUkACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ6m1ACfefhRA+UQGJEuFs8DTl/ADj3b
IeUAoLcfBcOUTVAw9uLSYxRxdAMYV/An
=EJ4l
-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 )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 2, OK: 45

2011-11-16 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

 [1]FAILED  Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-32bit-linux 
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052701.html


This looks like maybe a transient network failure::

 While: Installing test. Getting distribution for
 'zope.app.pagetemplate==3.4.1'. Error: Couldn't find a distribution
 for 'zope.app.pagetemplate==3.4.1'.

AFIACT, http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.app.pagetemplate/3.4.1 is just fine.


 [2]FAILED  winbot / zope.app.publisher_py_265_32 
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052705.html


And another::

 Download error: [Errno 10060] A connection attempt failed because the 
 connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or 
 established connection failed because connected host has failed to
 respond -- Some packages may not be found! Couldn't find index page
 for 'zc.buildout' (maybe misspelled?)



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/

iEYEARECAAYFAk7DtmAACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7iHACfcPihcr9YdL/vsro583ixqKfl
nh8AoNoqbb7k2Cm3tlm/EGvxDkt6QhyW
=oQuD
-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 )


Re: [Zope-dev] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Christian Theune
On 11/16/2011 02:06 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1

 On 11/16/2011 07:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
 charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu  wrote:
 Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro
 rege...@gmail.com:

 Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having
 both confuses the heck out of me.

 Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I
 think we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser
 layers, well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think
 that CMF Skins still offer some functionality that you don't get
 with browser layers out of the box.

 When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.

 Note that for all their warts, they are *massively* more successful than
 the Z3 reimplementation, which was overengineered (I helped with that,
 I'm sure).  In particular, the exceesive amount of ZCA majyk makes
 complicaterd uses of the Z3 skins very fragile (easy to misconfigure,
 hard to discover what you broke).

But they also have their merits. If I could make a wish, I'd like to see 
a shared implementation that marries all the benefits. :)

Something I love a lot is the ++skin++ traverser for example. I also 
like the idea of tagging the Request object with structured 
information (an interface) to indicate specialisation.

I hate that I have to spell the layer in each ZCML statement.

Just my 0.02,
Christian

-- 
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh  co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Charlie Clark
Am 16.11.2011, 15:15 Uhr, schrieb Christian Theune c...@gocept.com:

 But they also have their merits. If I could make a wish, I'd like to see
 a shared implementation that marries all the benefits.

 Something I love a lot is the ++skin++ traverser for example. I also
 like the idea of tagging the Request object with structured
 information (an interface) to indicate specialisation.

 I hate that I have to spell the layer in each ZCML statement.

Smells like a ZIP to me. ;-)

Charlie
-- 
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting  Research
German Office
Kronenstr. 27a
Düsseldorf
D- 40217
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Laurence Rowe
On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
 charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu wrote:
 Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com:

 Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
 confuses the heck out of me.

 Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
 we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,
 well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins
 still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out
 of the box.

 When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.

While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of
competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be
careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of
CMF skin scripts and templates in Plone that I don't want to become a
blocker for adopting Zope 4. This should be the first of several
releases that progressively rationalise our software stack, lets not
try and do it all at once.

Laurence
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Christian Theune
On 11/16/2011 04:12 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
 On 16 November 2011 12:28, Lennart Regebrorege...@gmail.com  wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:53, Charlie Clark
 charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu  wrote:
 Am 16.11.2011, 12:49 Uhr, schrieb Lennart Regebrorege...@gmail.com:

 Right. Could we standardize on skins or browserlayers plz? Having both
 confuses the heck out of me.

 Definitely a topic that needs (re)-opening. From a CMF point of I think
 we're just about at the point where we could switch to browser layers,
 well, at least once CMF 2.3 has been released. But I think that CMF Skins
 still offer some functionality that you don't get with browser layers out
 of the box.

 When I said skins I meant ++skins++. CMF Skins must die.

 While I think there is definitely scope for simplifying the mix of
 competing skin concepts in the Zope/CMF/Plone space, we need to be
 careful not to bite off more than we can chew. We still have a lot of
 CMF skin scripts and templates in Plone that I don't want to become a
 blocker for adopting Zope 4. This should be the first of several
 releases that progressively rationalise our software stack, lets not
 try and do it all at once.

Ack.


-- 
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh  co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
___
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] Revert removal of ++skin++ in Zope4?

2011-11-16 Thread Christian Theune
On 11/16/2011 11:30 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
 Hi,

 I'd like to revert the removal of the ++skin++ traverser in Zope 4.

 As we're working on a replacement ZMI at a sprint currently (more
 details about that in a bit) we'd like to leverage this feature.

   From my perspective, I value that Zope 2/4 has always made some choices
 upfront that one could leverage right away. Especially as multiple
 orthogonal components (like: your application and the ZMI) need to
 leverage this plugin point, I'd rather have this provided by the framework.

 I couldn't find an argument anywhere why ++skin++ should be gone.

I'm interpreting the thread overall as an OK to revive the ++skin++ 
traverser.

Thanks,
Christian

-- 
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh  co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations
___
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 4 ZMI sprint report

2011-11-16 Thread Christian Theune
Hi,

as you might have noticed there was a sprint and we'd like to update you 
on what happened. :) Sorry if we under-communicated beforehand.

As part of the DZUG[1] sprint series[2] we tried looking into what a 
refreshed ZMI for Zope 4 could be.

We started working on some code (it's really not that much) and gathered 
our thoughts[3] about the ZMI that might be interesting for you to read. 
We hope to follow up on this in the near future.

However, we also discussed technical and organisational hurdles that we 
met and that kept us from just doing the ZMI and we're currently 
approaching the Zope Foundation board about officially establishing 
the Zope 4 project and concentrating our efforts on that.

We think there will be a need (and we have some ideas for that) to 
establish project management, a mission statement and road map so that 
we can all channel our efforts together.

Cheers,
Christian Theune (and Charlie Clark, Veit Schiele, Yvo Schubbe, Jens 
Vagelpohl)

[1] In case you haven't heard, we're in the process of renaming this to
Python Software Verband - Germany's Python Software Foundation. So
 PySV will be showing up instead of DZUG in the future.

[2] We're working on a sprint series concept that will establish
 sprint opportunities for Python-related projects in Germany on a
 quarterly basis. I personally hope to use those to work on stuff
 like Zope 4 in a more productive manner than with those sprint days
 attached to an already exhausting conference.

[3] http://docs.zope.org/zmi.core/thoughts.html

-- 
Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com
gocept gmbh  co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany
http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 0 · fax +49 345 1229889 1
Zope and Plone consulting, development, hosting, operations

___
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 - FAILED: 3, OK: 43

2011-11-16 Thread Zope tests summarizer
This is the summary for test reports received on the 
zope-tests list between 2011-11-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2011-11-16 00:00:00 UTC:

See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds.

An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our 
buildbot documentation: 
http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/process/buildbots.html#the-nightly-builds

Reports received


   Bluebream / Python2.5.5 64bit linux
   Bluebream / Python2.6.7 64bit linux
   Bluebream / Python2.7.2 64bit linux
   ZTK 1.0 / Python2.4.6 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.0 / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.0 / Python2.6.7 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.4.6 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.0dev / Python2.6.7 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.1 / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.1 / Python2.6.7 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.1 / Python2.7.2 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.1dev / Python2.5.5 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.1dev / Python2.6.7 Linux 64bit
   ZTK 1.1dev / Python2.7.2 Linux 64bit
   Zope 3.4 KGS / Python2.4.6 64bit linux
   Zope 3.4 KGS / Python2.5.5 64bit linux
   Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-32bit-linux
   Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.4-64bit-linux
   Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-32bit-linux
   Zope 3.4 Known Good Set / py2.5-64bit-linux
   Zope-2.10 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
   Zope-2.11 Python-2.4.6 : Linux
   Zope-2.12 Python-2.6.6 : Linux
   Zope-2.12-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux
   Zope-2.13 Python-2.6.6 : Linux
   Zope-2.13-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux
   Zope-trunk Python-2.6.6 : Linux
   Zope-trunk-alltests Python-2.6.6 : Linux
   winbot / ZODB_dev py_254_win32
   winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win32
   winbot / ZODB_dev py_265_win64
[1]winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32
[2]winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64
   winbot / ztk_10 py_254_win32
   winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win32
   winbot / ztk_10 py_265_win64
   winbot / ztk_11 py_254_win32
   winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win32
   winbot / ztk_11 py_265_win64
   winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win32
   winbot / ztk_11 py_270_win64
   winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win32
[3]winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64
   winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win32
   winbot / ztk_dev py_270_win64

Non-OK results
--

[1]FAILED  winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32
   https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052734.html


[2]FAILED  winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64
   https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052735.html


[3]FAILED  winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64
   https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052766.html


___
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] security.public/private/protected decorators

2011-11-16 Thread Florian Friesdorf

Hi Matthew, Alan,

as discussed during ploneconf2011 I wrote the decorators:
security.public
security.private
security.protected
as successors to their declareX pendants.

All new code is fully covered (except a raise).

@all: please review AccessControl r123394 - r123399

security.protected('permission') returns a decorator and it should be
ensured that all those decorators are actually called, i.e. that the @
isn't missing.

flo
-- 
Florian Friesdorf f...@chaoflow.net
  GPG FPR: 7A13 5EEE 1421 9FC2 108D  BAAF 38F8 99A3 0C45 F083
Jabber/XMPP: f...@chaoflow.net
IRC: chaoflow on freenode,ircnet,blafasel,OFTC


pgpL1PCNZa8O3.pgp
Description: 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 )


Re: [Zope-dev] security.public/private/protected decorators

2011-11-16 Thread Florian Friesdorf

Sorry, forgot to Cc a couple of people involved in discussion and
solution included in this mail.

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:33:56 -0800, Florian Friesdorf f...@chaoflow.net wrote:
 
 Hi Matthew, Alan,
 
 as discussed during ploneconf2011 I wrote the decorators:
 security.public
 security.private
 security.protected
 as successors to their declareX pendants.
 
 All new code is fully covered (except a raise).
 
 @all: please review AccessControl r123394 - r123399
 
 security.protected('permission') returns a decorator and it should be
 ensured that all those decorators are actually called, i.e. that the @
 isn't missing.
 
 flo

-- 
Florian Friesdorf f...@chaoflow.net
  GPG FPR: 7A13 5EEE 1421 9FC2 108D  BAAF 38F8 99A3 0C45 F083
Jabber/XMPP: f...@chaoflow.net
IRC: chaoflow on freenode,ircnet,blafasel,OFTC


pgpdXIYoRPGZW.pgp
Description: 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 )


Re: [Zope-dev] zope-tests - FAILED: 3, OK: 43

2011-11-16 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

 [1]FAILED  winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win32 
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052734.html
 
 
 [2]FAILED  winbot / ZODB_dev py_270_win64 
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052735.html


These two look like transient network failures during boostrapping.



 [3]FAILED  winbot / ztk_dev py_265_win64 
 https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052766.html


This one too, only the boostrap failure was silent, so it blew up in the
buildout step.



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/

iEYEARECAAYFAk7EjUYACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ6f9gCg26uw9CfudCFOzmtO6w0fqVEb
9KsAoLwFL9UCvoOeE5nWTHG5oOCGvA0d
=j2Vw
-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 )