Re: [Zope-dev] Porting Zope to Python 3 Update
On 2013-03-02 00:34:04 +, Stephan Richter said: Hi everyone, as the week ends, I thought I might give a brief update on the Python 3 porting effort. According to the "Unofficial Zope on Python 3 status page"[1], about 110 packages are ported to Python 3.3. Hanno and I worked this week on updating the ZTK configuration files and I am happy to announce that the ZTK passes all tests on Python 3.3! So once the ZODB is ported, we can start on finalizing all releases, which would pave the way for a ZTK 2.0 release. Marius has made great efforts on finishing the port of ZODB. All the tests pass now on the py3 branch for Python 2.6, 2.7 and 3.3. He has also removed all resource warnings (he started at 400+). The final task will be to integrate zodbpickle. zodbpickle needs some changes to properly enable the "noload()" method. Luckily this work will entail rewriting the dump/load of persistent ids to be more efficient and compatible with cPickle 2.7 pickles. (We are working hard on making Python 2 pickles load on Python 3!) On Wednesday, I was able to run a first Zope 3 (or should I say Bluebream?) app on Python 3.3. Thanks to Andrey and Albertas for porting some of the complex application packages. The sample application can be found in ``zope.paste``[2]. Note the short ZCML[3] and Paster[4] files. Thanks goes to everyone who helped breaking unnecessary and circular dependencies to make this work so well! In the process of all of the above, we have also started moving all packages that we are ported to Python 3 over to GitHub. I have also ported the core packages for Zope 2/4 and Grok already. So what's next? I am in the process of trying to port a rather large demo application[5] to Python 3. We are about 20 packages (that we control) away from that goal. Andrey is currently working on porting zope.testbrowser to Python 3 by changing its internal implementation from mechanize to WebTest (since it is too hard to deal with mechanize). Also, we will have a serious look at ZEO. I hope I got some of you interested in thinking about porting applications to Python 3. Yes! Very exciting update, thank you. And speaking of old libraries supporting Python 3, in case anyone needs PIL with their Python 3 Zope apps, I could use some help testing the soon-to-be-released Pillow 2.0 (PIL fork) with Python 3 support: git://github.com/python-imaging/Pillow.git. [1] http://zope3.pov.lt/py3/ [2] https://github.com/zopefoundation/zope.paste [3] https://github.com/zopefoundation/zope.paste/blob/master/src/zope/paste/test_app/app.zcml [4] https://github.com/zopefoundation/zope.paste/blob/master/src/zope/paste/test_app/app.ini [5] https://github.com/CipherHealth/cipher.uibuilderdemo Regards, Stephan -- Alex Clark · http://about.me/alex.clark ___ 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] unofficial svn mirror on github
On 2012-10-05 08:47:25 +, johannes raggam said: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/05/2012 10:39 AM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On Oct 5, 2012, at 10:21 , johannes raggam wrote: I placed a note in the description, that the github repository is a unofficial mirror from svn.zope.org. I think about cloning even more relevant repositories from svn.zope.org, create a script to automatically sync it once per day and move it over to github, maybe a organisation called github.com/ZopeMirror What do you think about this? Hi Johannes, The board has decided to allow GitHub hosting for Zope Foundation projects at the last board meeting, the minutes are still in the approval process. We are working on the implementation. Please don't create anything that will confuse people looking for canonical Zope Foundation repositories. There's no need to duplicate an effort that is progressing already. Thanks, this are good news. There is some experience with moving the SVN repository from the Plone community (http://collective.github.com/). Let me know if I can help here. There is also: - https://github.com/plone/svn-migrate But if you are doing it by hand, it's roughly: - Create authors.txt file (with mapping: svnuser = Git User ) - $ svn2git -v --no-minimize-url --authors=authors.txt svn+ssh://svn.zope.org/repos/main/target_repo - $ git remote add origin g...@github.com:ZopeCommunity/new_repo.git - $ git push -u origin master# track the remote repo locally - $ git push --all# push all the branches - $ git push --tags# push all the tags Alex Johannes Thanks! jens ___ 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 ) - -- programmatic web development di(fh) johannes raggam / thet python plone zope development mail: off...@programmatic.pro web: http://programmatic.pro http://bluedynamics.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlBunp0ACgkQW4mNMQxDgAfXaACgs9YuiSw9+yS2hKBUvteOoFXD CL8An3oEEVC5zak9u28vk0VOk+zhCc9f =loJm -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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net ___ 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] zc.buildout semi-resolution
Hi Jim, On 2012-08-20 15:48:48 +, Jim Fulton said: [snip] I agree with and/or appreciate all of your comments above. That would have been a good time to realize that there might be more widespread breakage and revert the deletion or bring back the buildout directory. Agreed, sorry about that. Removing trunk broke my builds, at which point I cut a new release of buildout.bootstrap containing the new URL: - http://pypi.python.org/pypi/buildout.bootstrap/1.4.2 Well, hopefully, all's well now. Thanks for helping. (really) No problem, glad to support buildout development. We should also thank Domen Kožar and Chris Lambacher for their work on 1.6.x (which we still need help with). Alex Jim -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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] zc.buildout semi-resolution
Hi, FWIW I spoke with Jim on #buildout this a.m. and he decided to revert my commit "because people need it". I.e. Some folks rely on trunk/bootstrap existing for their builds. While I don't necessarily agree that's a good idea, the argument "because people need it" makes 1000x more sense to me than "Please revert" with no explanation. Or with a legal explanation I don't understand. I apologize to Jens and Tres if I was stubborn about this, but I did and still do feel strongly the commit I made was reasonable, and not reverting it until we could better understand the circumstances was reasonable too. To clear up any remaining confusion: - In the Plone community, it is quite common to make this type of change to indicate active development takes place somewhere else. We leave tags (and branches) in place in case people need them. I did not remove, or move the zc.buildout project, nor did I intend to disrupt development in any way. I simply wanted to "leave a message" on behalf of the work Jim and Domen were doing. - Personally, I use an extension called "buildout.bootstrap" to always download the latest bootstrap.py file. Removing trunk broke my builds, at which point I cut a new release of buildout.bootstrap containing the new URL: - http://pypi.python.org/pypi/buildout.bootstrap/1.4.2 I hope the discussion on GitHub and Bitbucket, and other vendor services continues. Alex -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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] [Checkins] SVN: zc.buildout/ Moved to github
On 2012-08-20 08:15:55 +, Andi Zeidler said: On Aug 20, 2012, at 3:08 , Martin Aspeli wrote: I think Jens is right to point out the legal concerns, which many of us don't fully understand. I think it might have been more effective had it pointed out why people should care, rather than just saying "this is the rule". +1 it seems to me the ZF should consider having a lawyer check the legal implications of dealing with github instead of just stating again and again that the situation is not clear (and therefore they cannot do anything). as it looks the 1.6.1 release has already been made from github, and under the ZPL. if i understand jens correctly this shouldn't even be possible… IIUC Jens' valid concern is that non-contributors have contributed to "the work", making legal ownership unclear. Reverting my commit won't fix this (or at least I don't understand fully how or why reverting my commit offers us any legal protection, which seems to be the concern). IMHO we need to get Domen Kožar to sign the contributor agreement, and finish the discussion on the "code ownership" list about how to move forward. Alex best regards, andi -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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] [Checkins] SVN: zc.buildout/ Moved to github
Hi Jens, On 2012-08-19 06:51:47 +, Jens Vagelpohl said: On Aug 19, 2012, at 0:01 , Alex Clark wrote: Hi Jens, On 2012-08-18 07:49:59 +, Jens Vagelpohl said: Hi Alex, Please revert this checkin. You can't just take core software pieces from Zope Foundation-hosted repositories and move them somewhere else. Thanks! I think you are confused. I would suggest you ask Jim Fulton about it, as he moved Buildout to GitHub months ago. Both 1.6.x and 2.x are under active development there. Again, there's a confusion about perceived and legal ownership. You care about legal ownership because it's your job to do so. I care about helping people and shipping code because that's my job. The only thing I feel like I am confused about is why the ZF is asking me to make a change when the action-that-matters was taken months ago by someone else? Why are you making an example out of me? Shouldn't you instead address the "real" issue (which is that Jim moved Buildout)? The code is still there in the previous revision. I didn't maliciously destroy anything. Why does the ZF feel so strongly about the issue that they need to ask me to revert an innocous, nothing-but-well-intentioned change? Have we not lost our way a bit, if this is the case? What good is the legal protection of our software, if we are just sitting around fighting about it, instead of building the software? Sorry, Jens, I don't mean to accuse you or Tres in any way. I just don't understand this situation -at-all- and I don't understand why the "right" thing to do in this case is to focus all this attention on my trivial commit, which obviously alerted you to a situation that had already begun months ago, without me. Alex jens ___ 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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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] [Checkins] SVN: zc.buildout/ Moved to github
Hi Tres, On 2012-08-19 15:52:52 +, Tres Seaver said: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/18/2012 09:58 PM, Alex Clark wrote: Hi, On 2012-08-19 01:24:31 +, Lennart Regebro said: On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: Because the ability to check into svn.zope.org is based on a "chain of custody" managed by the ZF (web account, verified e-mail address, and SSH key). J. Random Hacker's account on Github has no such chain. Sure, but Random J Hacker shouldn't have write permission to the repository, so I don't understand why that makes a difference. IANAL but from my perspective the legitimate issue here is that Domen Ko?ar has not signed the Zope Contributor's Agreement, but Jim has added him to the Buildout organization on GitHub and he has been committing fixes. If I were the ZF, I would either: - Make sure everyone in any ZF organizations on GitHub (e.g. buildout) has signed the contributor agreement, or - Declare that nothing on GitHub (or at least in the buildout organization) is a valid contribution to "the work". In either case, AFAICT zc.buildout development has stopped on svn.zope.org and started on GitHub so let us let the commit stand to reflect this real world circumstance. Alex, please revert the commit removing the ZF's copy of the code in SVN. I don't really feel comfortable doing that (for a variety of reasons). But if you or anyone else wants to do it, I won't object. Would you mind doing it for me, if you feel that strongly about it? Probably something like: $ svn cp -r127509 svn+ssh://svn.zope.org/repos/main/zc.buildout/trunk svn+ssh://svn.zope.org/repos/main/zc.buildout/trunk Thank you and sorry for the trouble, Alex Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlAxC9QACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7gOgCfd+h0SnF8jVLNTaJIldH4qbQV +pEAoK7Qc7WVZ2whyA1UOSCYqQc1cNp3 =6T6l -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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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] [Checkins] SVN: zc.buildout/ Moved to github
Hi On 2012-08-19 11:05:39 +, Lennart Regebro said: On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: Speaking for myself as ZF representative, it is my duty to make sure that chain of custody for the code is upheld and safeguarded. Convenience, which I feel is driving the move towards GitHub, is nice to have. But I would not do my job if I didn't make extra-sure that any move for Zope Foundation code did not fulfil all legal requirements before spending much thought on convenience. Absolutely, and you are doing a good job as well, as you have no identified a problem that we have been having for a long time, before the problem actually turns legal. That's an amazing relief, because it means we can fix it. FWIW I have pointed Domen Kožar at the contributor agreement instructions located here: - http://docs.zope.org/developer/becoming-a-committer.html and he is interested in signing. What I'd like to see is this issue addressed by a lawyer so we can figure out how to make GitHub work for Zope. If Jim's work on Buildout 2 on GitHub is considered a fork, then I think something is wrong with our process. Here are some scenarios to demonstrate what I think the important issues we must clarify are: Scenario 1 -- - Alex has signed the contributor agreement and commits code to svn.zope.org, no problem. Scenario 2 --- - Alex has signed the contributor agreement and commits patches from other people (who have not signed the agreement) to svn.zope.org, not allowed, IIUC. Scenario 3 --- - Alex has signed the contributor agreement and commits code to GitHub/buildout, no problem. Scenario 4 --- - Alex has signed the contributor agreement and commits patches from other people (who have not signed the agreement) to GitHub/buildout not allowed, IIUC. Scenario 5 --- - No commits from anyone who has not signed the contributor agreement are allowed. If we can all agree on the above, then the only thing left AFAICT is for the ZF to "bless" GitHub/buildout as a ZF repository and have a lawyer confirm that this blessing has merit from a legal perspective. Alex //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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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] [Checkins] SVN: zc.buildout/ Moved to github
Hi, On 2012-08-19 01:24:31 +, Lennart Regebro said: On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: Because the ability to check into svn.zope.org is based on a "chain of custody" managed by the ZF (web account, verified e-mail address, and SSH key). J. Random Hacker's account on Github has no such chain. Sure, but Random J Hacker shouldn't have write permission to the repository, so I don't understand why that makes a difference. IANAL but from my perspective the legitimate issue here is that Domen Kožar has not signed the Zope Contributor's Agreement, but Jim has added him to the Buildout organization on GitHub and he has been committing fixes. If I were the ZF, I would either: - Make sure everyone in any ZF organizations on GitHub (e.g. buildout) has signed the contributor agreement, or - Declare that nothing on GitHub (or at least in the buildout organization) is a valid contribution to "the work". In either case, AFAICT zc.buildout development has stopped on svn.zope.org and started on GitHub so let us let the commit stand to reflect this real world circumstance. Alex //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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com___ 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] [Checkins] SVN: zc.buildout/ Moved to github
Hi On 2012-08-18 22:01:51 +, Alex Clark said: Hi Jens, On 2012-08-18 07:49:59 +, Jens Vagelpohl said: Hi Alex, Please revert this checkin. You can't just take core software pieces from Zope Foundation-hosted repositories and move them somewhere else. Thanks! I think you are confused. I would suggest you ask Jim Fulton about it, as he moved Buildout to GitHub months ago. Both 1.6.x and 2.x are under active development there. Further, I committed the *message* about the move and I removed trunk to avoid confusion, I didn't personally move anything (Jim moved 2.x and Domen Kožar moved trunk to the 1.6.x branch). Also please see the distutils-sig list for more information about recent zc.buildout 1.6.x development. And… sorry. Using a new client and I missed the ongoing thread :-) Alex Alex jens On Aug 18, 2012, at 3:09 , J. Alexander Clark wrote: Log message for revision 127519: Moved to github Changed: A zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt D zc.buildout/trunk/ -=- Added: zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt === --- zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt (rev 0) +++ zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt 2012-08-18 01:09:06 UTC (rev 127519) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +https://github.com/buildout/buildout/tree/1.6.x ___ checkins mailing list check...@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/checkins ___ 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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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] [Checkins] SVN: zc.buildout/ Moved to github
Hi Jens, On 2012-08-18 07:49:59 +, Jens Vagelpohl said: Hi Alex, Please revert this checkin. You can't just take core software pieces from Zope Foundation-hosted repositories and move them somewhere else. Thanks! I think you are confused. I would suggest you ask Jim Fulton about it, as he moved Buildout to GitHub months ago. Both 1.6.x and 2.x are under active development there. Further, I committed the *message* about the move and I removed trunk to avoid confusion, I didn't personally move anything (Jim moved 2.x and Domen Kožar moved trunk to the 1.6.x branch). Also please see the distutils-sig list for more information about recent zc.buildout 1.6.x development. Alex jens On Aug 18, 2012, at 3:09 , J. Alexander Clark wrote: Log message for revision 127519: Moved to github Changed: A zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt D zc.buildout/trunk/ -=- Added: zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt === --- zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt (rev 0) +++ zc.buildout/README_MOVED_TO_GITHUB.txt 2012-08-18 01:09:06 UTC (rev 127519) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +https://github.com/buildout/buildout/tree/1.6.x ___ checkins mailing list check...@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/checkins ___ 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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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 4 release management
On 2/1/12 8:21 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote: On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 13:03, Alex Clark wrote: - what RCS software to use - where to host it It may be easier if we disentangled them. Traditionally it was easier, but now-a-days with github and bitbucket they are harder to disentangle. It is entangled, but it is important to notice that they are separate concerns. I do think the big issue is where to host it. Yes, fine, people have opinions on git vs svn vs hg, etc. But that boils down to 25% technical arguments, 25% what you are used to 25% what everyone else uses and then 30% religion to make sure the bucket overflows. But where to host it is a tricky issue. Ownership and control is one big argument for having our own servers. Githubs forking/merging process a big argument for going to github. Should you then decide that github is the place to host it, well, then git is the software to use. Actually, they introduced improved Subversion client support late last year: - https://github.com/blog/966-improved-subversion-client-support (they've supported import-from-svn and limited svn client support for longer) To be honest I see little point in just setting up our own git repository. Yeah, maybe git is better from some technical standpoints, but it's also harder to use, and the question then becomes just religion. What we would like to do, of course, is to have a self-hosted github. :-) (And that exists. Buuut... it costs $250 per commiter and year, so that's not an option, obviously.) //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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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 4 release management
On 2/1/12 6:08 AM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: On Feb 1, 2012, at 00:05 , Alex Clark wrote: Bottom line: Zope stands to benefit greatly if the current active developers keep an open mind about how/where/when development of Zope software should occur. There are plenty of people that still think Zope software is cool, and plenty of skilled developers on github that could potentially help move it forward. This discussion seems to unnecessarily combine at least two distinct issues: - what RCS software to use - where to host it It may be easier if we disentangled them. Traditionally it was easier, but now-a-days with github and bitbucket they are harder to disentangle. Speaking purely as a developer, I'm leaning to Git when it comes to the RCS software decision between Subversion and Git. But I can use both equally well. Where it is hosted, well, purely as a developer it doesn't matter to me, unless I need to give up too much personal data to get access. From the perspective as a Zope Foundation member the RCS software decision is a technical detail that doesn't matter much. I'm more concerned with the "where" question, though. The Zope Foundation is tasked with safeguarding the software released under the Zope Foundation umbrella, and it is tasked with enforcing the contributor agreements everyone signed. Commits can only be made by signed contributors, and contributors are specifically disallowed to take outside code they don't own and commit it to the repository. We already have the technical infrastructure in place for most of this, such as ZF-controlled logins on svn.zope.org, access only via SSH key, etc. Our current "where" can be fully trusted, so to speak, and the people tasked with maintaining this infrastructure are known, accountable, and part of the foundation. My third role is secretary of the Zope Foundation Board of Directors and in that role I collect and maintain contributor applications and the (private) data associated with it. I can vouch that our current means of storing this data is reasonably secure. I can't make that assertion if the data is stored somewhere out of Zope Foundation control. My last role is admin for the ZF infrastructure and servers. In that role I would be involved in executing any changes in repository hosting. If only the RCS software changes that's a chunk of work, but doable. Git service can be added to the ZF infrastructure and packages can be migrated into Git repositories, probably on a "as-needed" basis. Most of the current authentication and safety infrastructure could stay in place. On balance and taking all my roles into account, sticking with SVN and the current hosting is the most attractive option. Moving to Git in the current hosting environment is doable, it means work, but I feel I've done my job keeping the software, access to it, and contributor data as secure as possible. Any option that involves moving to a different host altogether not only makes me feel I haven't done my job, it may also throw up legal questions. Fair enough, all of this sounds reasonable. My only point was that it should be someone's role in the ZF to take a look around at the available options in today's software development ecosystem. If github.com is attractive to you, great. If it's not and you are happy with the status quo, also fine. But like anything else, there are pros and cons associated with either approach. E.g. Plone's move to github has been a challenge for a lot of people, and we continue to struggle with it everyday; but I know it was the right move for the software and the project so I feel good about what we are doing. Alex jens ___ 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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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 4 release management
Alex I don't have any opinion on where the canonical repository should be hosted - I know some people have strong opinions that this should be on Zope Foundation controlled hardware. I would note that hosting Git repositories without Github reduces the value proposition substantially: Git's wins in merging are much less significant than the collaboration workflow changes which github makes possible (tracking pull requests, in particular). Launchpad provides a similar mechanism, albeit one which is less sexy to use. OTOH, github's bug tracker is nothing to write home about, compared to Launchpad. Right - Plone has chosen to stick with self-hosted Trac for bug tracking. I'd imagine Lanchpad remaining Zope's bug tracker. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk7FZGQACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7JBwCeNfwV5YpDX1kj5LOLoojl9RDu guQAnRxA77PShUIQl4GmEGP4naM+Abzf =C/n7 -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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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 2 WSGI investigation
On 1/11/12 5:59 AM, Sylvain Viollon wrote: Op 9 jan 2012, om 12:44 heeft Marius Gedminas het volgende geschreven: On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 10:01:29AM +0100, Sylvain Viollon wrote: You can't set a virtual path with the Host header, it is not valid if you want to follow the RFC. After as well, you can include the port in it, but I think you are not sure if you can't really know if you should create https URL or not, you don't have this information (this is not required only to be on port 443, and if it is I am not even sure the port is correctly added in the Host header). In the WSGI world it's usual to use the X-Forwarded-Scheme header to determine the scheme (http or https), AFAIU. I have nothing against using those headers, even if there disparities between some of the implementations. See e.g. http://pythonpaste.org/wsgiproxy/#the-proxy http://pythonpaste.org/deploy/modules/config.html#paste.deploy.config.PrefixMiddleware http://packages.python.org/Deliverance/proxy.html http://docs.pylonsproject.org/projects/pyramid_cookbook/en/latest/deployment/nginx.html FWIW I tried to get Zope2's WSGI working recently with repoze.vhm and failed: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8865349/mod-wsgi-zope2-plone-virtual-hosting-configuration, though the concept of using HTTP_X_VHM_* seemed to make sense at the time. Alex Regards, Sylvain, -- Alex Clark · http://pythonpackages.com ___ 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] Missing Zope2 tarballs
On 10/11/11 3:17 AM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>
> On Oct 11, 2011, at 03:33 , Alex Clark wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Anyone notice these missing tarballs?
>>
>> - http://old.zope.org/Products/Zope/2.9.12/Zope-2.9.12-final.tgz/
>> - http://old.zope.org/Products/Zope/2.10.13/Zope-2.10.13-final.tgz/
>> - http://old.zope.org/Products/Zope/2.11.4/Zope-2.11.4-final.tgz/
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> With the help of Jim, who produced a tarball containing the spidered content
> of old.zope.org, the site has been converted to a static site. There will
> inevitably be issues here and there. I'll take a look to see if I can find
> the original files from the old app server.
Thanks Jens, I know I occasionally need to build old Plone sites, as far
back as 2.1 but also sometimes 2.5.x and 3.{0,1,2}.x all of which use
the old tarballs ranging from Zope 2.8 - 2.11 (I think). Building these
sites will require at least the "final" from each series to continue
working. Ultimately, I'd love to be able to access all the old tarballs
e.g. similar to:
- http://dist.plone.org/archive/
But I realize this may require some significant bit of effort!
Thanks again for the effort,
Alex
>
> jens
>
>
> ___
> 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 )
>
--
Alex Clark · http://aclark.net
___
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] Missing Zope2 tarballs
Hi, Anyone notice these missing tarballs? - http://old.zope.org/Products/Zope/2.9.12/Zope-2.9.12-final.tgz/ - http://old.zope.org/Products/Zope/2.10.13/Zope-2.10.13-final.tgz/ - http://old.zope.org/Products/Zope/2.11.4/Zope-2.11.4-final.tgz/ (sorry for the redundant post, I posted this on plone-dev a bit earlier…) Alex -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net ___ 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] beta.zope.org (www.zope.org relaunch project)
Hi Jens, On 5/11/11 1:54 AM, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 5/11/11 02:04 , Alex Clark wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 5/10/11 5:38 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote: >>> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 09:15, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: >>>> I strongly disagree on the term "Zope 2". Now is a great time to finally >>>> stop the Zope2/3 confusion: Kill that name and start using a more >>>> sensible name, such as "the Zope application server". >> >> >> Right. However I'm not convinced this is something you can >> agree/disagree on. Zope 2 exists. Zope 3 does not (it was split apart >> and renamed). As such, I don't see a problem with referring to it (Zope >> 2) by name (it's not Voldemort, after all). Someday it will die; but >> that day is not today. And until that day comes (or it gets renamed, >> heaven forbid) I would strive for clear and consistent branding (and in >> this case, I think I would also try to make it clear that Zope 2 is >> "legacy" software). > > Zope 2 was never a brand. It only existed to have a name for the older > application server when Zope 3 existed. It led to confusion and still > does. The name must go away. It is now the only application server with > the "Zope" name left, and that's a simple, clear and consistent brand. > We can help make the Zope 2 name go away by stopping its use on > "official" community sites like the new zope.org. That's a good point. And I didn't mean to suggest Zope2 itself was a brand, just that the "Zope" brand could be improved by clarifying its offerings. Anyway, I can probably live with "Zope" being synonymous for "Zope 2 application server" (like regebro says, it is the status quo.) In which case, the "brand" becomes synonymous with its most famous offering. Alex > > jens > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) > Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org > > iEYEARECAAYFAk3KJIkACgkQRAx5nvEhZLKBOACffi+SkGRq9/3Ars6S4XzJmRV7 > tzUAnii+Et4rAsqUcUHRVO8k3WDne3EE > =Shk6 > -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 ) > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net/training ___ 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] beta.zope.org (www.zope.org relaunch project)
Hi, On 5/10/11 5:38 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote: > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 09:15, Jens Vagelpohl wrote: >> I strongly disagree on the term "Zope 2". Now is a great time to finally >> stop the Zope2/3 confusion: Kill that name and start using a more >> sensible name, such as "the Zope application server". Right. However I'm not convinced this is something you can agree/disagree on. Zope 2 exists. Zope 3 does not (it was split apart and renamed). As such, I don't see a problem with referring to it (Zope 2) by name (it's not Voldemort, after all). Someday it will die; but that day is not today. And until that day comes (or it gets renamed, heaven forbid) I would strive for clear and consistent branding (and in this case, I think I would also try to make it clear that Zope 2 is "legacy" software). > > Yup. That or just "Zope". That is what people mean when they say Zope anyway. I don't think they know what they mean :-) Alex > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net/training ___ 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] beta.zope.org (www.zope.org relaunch project)
Hi, On 5/10/11 12:55 AM, Andreas Jung wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi there, > > I am happy to announce that we have made progress > with the zope.org relaunch project. The first public > version of the new site is now available under > > http://beta.zope.org > > The basic idea behind the project is: > > - a minimalistic www.zope.org site giving a short > overview about what "Zope" is - including all > related app servers, CMSes, frameworks etc. > which links to the related project sites (micro-site > approach) > > - no more member contents on www.zope.org > > - the current www.zope.org will be stripped down > to the current member contents and stuff that > has to be preserved. www.zope.org will be > renamed to old.zope.org later > > Constructive criticism and feedback is welcome _now_. Looks great, well done all! Thanks for putting in the effort. My one (very minor) nit would be that we try to over-emphasize and over-clarify what "Zope" is (and is not), anywhere and everywhere possible. And by that, I mean: - "Zope" is: a brand, a term for any Zope-related technology, a general term. It no longer refers to anything specific. It is all-encompassing. - "Zope 2" is the original web application server. - "Bluebream" is the former-Zope 3 web application server. - "ZTK" is a set of re-usable libraries. And so on. Alex > > I hope that we can fix the outstanding issues and integrate > further feedback over the next few week in order to roll > out the new site in the first half of June (2011 of course). > > Many thanks to my team (doing the real work): > > - - Michael Haubenwaller > - - Kai Mertens > - - Johannes Raggam > > Andreas Jung > Zope Foundation > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iQGUBAEBAgAGBQJNyMVOAAoJEADcfz7u4AZjTgoLvigFQqPKlnn9J97+wrQRJkdr > 8ErOiV6LCmpQeNLGDVodq0Y4JGnfQELu0ByzRz+xdig3NDAY9WyKTcxjJqu7DJ4H > NnZ49dK47uvZaYbfq0kKjzIw9/FX092t5+lyVdiYst1d3JGEphz1iDsl+rySu4m1 > xf3Zq5/+HH0xl2NPQ391dqPuoka+93ydygBfqR7TbBxr4t1GcbFs6vMhN5/13I7c > g/Q6CWCKlBOfdSnof+p1M/EHtLelst7LPHXluB5tLSQcbpbhd3vtV2x19+InNBWs > 3vbaWz9EFPQVdgrAc8f3Npw6+t1tn2JMBlLEJtwLmaErqjgDA4MMEmOmJPqNDqYo > 7fyVWy0+OFeJdrGtO6MOZvmkgTxp+DBYjCOqzhzBijoHGaBQz1RsfH8IrWqhI+Av > PRihsjM6ZBEhVcHyW/FIQfSvsYJCsim+xxcfkmUhUjXSD6j2h4BBjNnnyI2JRHkq > iu0A27ANzqZrHx8rRipFcU9gJqLtBfA= > =8/ed > -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 ) -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net/training ___ 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] What happens when a KGS changes?
On 2/17/11 12:35 PM, Hanno Schlichting wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Alex Clark wrote: >> How do we handle a situation like the one I'm about to describe w/4.1a3 >> and c.xdv? > > Did you mean to sent this to the plone-dev list? Hah, yup. Sorry for the noise, all! > > Hanno > ___ > 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 ) > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net/help-me-help-plone ___ 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] What happens when a KGS changes?
Folks, How do we handle a situation like the one I'm about to describe w/4.1a3 and c.xdv? I've been tracking 4.1 on aclark.net and in order to get the latest alpha to fly (i.e. install via buildout) I had to add a couple custom pins: - https://github.com/aclark4life/aclark_net_website/blob/master/buildout.cfg#L76 Should these go in: http://good-py.appspot.com/release/collective.xdv/1.0 ? (i.e. should the KGS be edited/changed). Or do we need a new KGS (e.g. http://good-py.appspot.com/release/collective.xdv/1.1 for 4.1)? Or what… I'm just curious about the process here. Thanks for any thoughts, Alex -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net/help-me-help-plone ___ 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] GenericSetup sans (Python) package?
Hi all, I floated an idea in a blog entry recently (here: http://blog.aclark.net/2011/01/19/new-website-for-2011/#todo) and I'm wondering if it's an attainable goal, or just a pipe dream: --- I want to add GenericSetup (GS) profiles outside Python packages (i.e. in the buildout via ZCML). Currently GenericSetup expects to be passed a context which is (I think) the old-style Zope 2 product object in the ZODB. But I can’t think of a reason why GS couldn’t be made to work sans that requirement (I’m just speculating though, I haven’t looked at the code yet). --- Should I bother checking out the Products.GenericSetup source code to see if something like this is possible? I really, really, really, don't want to create a Python package just so I can save a couple settings in my (Plone) site. Any thoughts appreciated, Alex -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Author · http://aclark.net/admin ___ 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] Hanno, please update the ZTK
On 2010-05-03, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > On 5/3/10 15:41 , Martijn Faassen wrote: >> Lennart Regebro wrote: >>> On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 13:22, Martijn Faassen >>> wrote: >>>> Wichert Akkerman wrote: > If we're going to make cheap shots: that's still a lot faster than the > grok release cycle. Guys, please, this is like watching your parents fight ;-) Can't we all just get along? :-) As someone looking in from the outside (Plone), and hoping to become more active in the Zope community in the future, I wonder what it's going to take to restore some harmony and direction in here? It seems like I've been reading various flames for months now. To put things in perspective, for folks in here who may be "too close to it", the Zope ecosystem is *really* starting to shape up IMO (i.e. leaving the Zope 3 confusion in the past, etc.). I think I understand it now (after years of study), and can actually explain it to others! So let's try to keep up the *great* work and let the "little things" slide… 2cents, Alex > Wichert. > ___ > 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 ) > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Author of Plone 3.3 Site Administration · http://aclark.net/plone-site-admin ___ 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] Zope2 ZMI and HTML5
On 2010-02-04, Charlie Clark wrote: > Am 04.02.2010, 13:13 Uhr, schrieb Tres Seaver : > >> I think perhaps Robert meant to say that Zope2 would[ no longer use DTML >> for any part of the ZMI, rather than removing the code which allows >> users applications to use DTML. > > This is something I would like to contribute to as it matches my skillset > and interests pretty well. From the responses so far it seems that most > people are so used to the ZMI that no change feels necessary and, let's > face it, it works well enough. However, for new people coming to Zope the > 1990nish of it is a bit off-putting: we've got all this cool technology > underneath but you wouldn't believe it when you look at it. And I don't > think much is required beyond dropping frames, the table-based layout > using PageTemplates rather than DTML. I have an open ticket on much the > same for CMFDefault which is where I will start from (from the point of > view of separating markup from layout). But my work rate isn't brilliant > so it would be good to have a sparring partner or two. +1, "works fine as is" or "will be dead before long" are not the best approaches IMO, factoring out the ZMI functionality in to something that folks can maintain and contribute to in the future if they want to, is. > Charlie -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Practical Plone 3 · http://tinyurl.com/practical-plone ___ 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] Where is the position of BlueBream in Zope ecosystem ?
On 2010-01-22, Hermann Himmelbauer wrote: > Am Freitag 22 Januar 2010 14:46:16 schrieb Lennart Regebro: >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 04:55, Alex Clark wrote: >> > We certainly >> > have not reached the goal of helping newcomers understand the Zope >> > ecosystem in any other way to date, IMO.) >> >> If this is so, then I'm surprised. It seems perfectly clear to me. >> >> 1. In the beginning there is Python, the language. >> >> 2. Then you get ZCA a component architecture for Python. It has >> nothing to do with Web whatsoever. >> >> 3. Then we have ZTK. A toolkit for building web frameworks. >> >> 4. On top of that we have Zope 2, BlueBream and Grok. >> >> 5. There is also BFG, which doesn't include/build on the ZTK (as the others >> do). >> >> >> It's pretty clear to me. Notice the almost complete lack of naming >> confusion, and the plethora of marketable names and TLA's. The paper >> pushers like these kinds of graphs (although I think we need something >> prettier, I might try do do something this weekend, but I'm no >> designer...) > > No problem that you are no designer, if the concept is clearly communicated, > there will be people around who can prettify it. > >> And when it comes to separating the frameworks it obviously becomes >> more complex. So we need to explain this, what the different framworks >> are good at in a clear way. I see it like this, but I could be wrong: > > The above list (and http://wiki.zope.org/bluebream/relationship-after.png, > which resembles the list) pretty much explains and structures things. > Personally, I think that Plone (and maybe other applications, e.g. Silva?) > are missing in the big picture (not necessary for explaining BlueBream, > though). +1 > The problem I see is where to go from this graph/list. I personally would > expect to be able to advance from there to project home pages. This is true > for grok/zope2/bluebream (in .zope.org), and also for BFG (bfg.repoze.org). > > What I can't find is some entry page for ZTK (at least I find > http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit). Nice would be something > like "ztk.zope.org" which could be similar to zope2.zope.org. +1 > > When it gets to ZCA, I can't find anything, except for Baiju's book and maybe > somewhere some document about the Zope Component Architecture. If we > introduce the word ZCA, I would recommend to put up a simple page on > e.g. "zca.zope.org", where people can learn what this is, links to a > documentation and maybe has some download/install information and some > tutorial. Right, I see http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.component/3.9.1 wrt to ZCA. > > Best Regards, > Hermann > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Practical Plone 3 · http://tinyurl.com/practical-plone ___ 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] Where is the position of BlueBream in Zope ecosystem ?
On 2010-01-22, Lennart Regebro wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 04:55, Alex Clark wrote: >> We certainly >> have not reached the goal of helping newcomers understand the Zope ecosystem >> in any other way to date, IMO.) > > If this is so, then I'm surprised. It seems perfectly clear to me. Ah! This is tremendously helpful, thanks. Just a few questions/comments. > 1. In the beginning there is Python, the language. > 2. Then you get ZCA a component architecture for Python. It has > nothing to do with Web whatsoever. E.g. zope.component and one or two others? > 3. Then we have ZTK. A toolkit for building web frameworks. This is where you lose me. What's an example of a ZTK package? I can't think of one off the top of my head… ah ok, I just found this: - http://docs.zope.org/zopetoolkit/releases/packages-trunk.html So ZTK is ZCA plus the bits that make it suitable for building web frameworks. And is it fair to say I can just build any web app with the ZTK? I don't need any of the frameworks that are already built, I'm free to reinvent the wheel if I choose too. > 4. On top of that we have Zope 2, BlueBream and Grok. I.e. The Frameworks™ > 5. There is also BFG, which doesn't include/build on the ZTK (as the others > do). Right, it's "loosely coupled" with the ZCA, but you can throw that out too, if you like? > It's pretty clear to me. Notice the almost complete lack of naming > confusion, and the plethora of marketable names and TLA's. The paper > pushers like these kinds of graphs (although I think we need something > prettier, I might try do do something this weekend, but I'm no > designer...) > > And when it comes to separating the frameworks it obviously becomes > more complex. So we need to explain this, what the different framworks > are good at in a clear way. I see it like this, but I could be wrong: > > * Zope 2 is the granddaddy of the frameworks. It's not really built on > top of ZTK, but includes it. You basically only use Zope 2 if you are > using some sort of software that builds on it, like Plone, Silva, or > something custom. > > To build on my earlier car analogy: Zope 2 is an old pickup truck. You > can get it to do anything. You can drop it from the top of a building > and it will run. When it breaks you whack it with a hammer until it's > not broken anymore. But it's diesel engine kinda stinks. > > * BlueBream used to be called Zope 3 and is a component based > enterprise kick-ass do everything framework. Everything is > configurable and it doesn't just include batteries, but a whole power > plant. Which admittedly can be tricky to run. > > BlueBream is a train. Fast, big and pulls heavy loads, and good for > the environment. If that's what you need, you know it. > > * Grok is an easier to use (and at least in the future also > smaller/lighter) framework than BlueBream, while retaining the > flexibility. Instead of having to configure everything, you have > sensible defaults. Less typing, and it doesn't feel like J2EE. > Inspired by frameworks like Django and Turbogears, you get the nice > Python framework feeling with the power of ZTK behind you. > > Grok is a an hybrid minibus. Easy to drive, infinitely reconfigurable > just by switching the seats around. > > * BFG is a minimalistic web framework built on Zope ideas and > experiences, but as a part of it's minimalistic nature does not > include *anything* of the ZTK, it just builds on the ZCA. But you can > use the ZTK, if you want to, you are just not required to do so. It's > for the purist, for the guy who wants to build his own streamlined > speedmonster. > > BFG is a frame with four wheels and an big engine. The rest is up to you. Right, and the apps built with those frameworks, e.g. Plone, Cyn.in, Zenoss, etc. Would be very helpful to include these in a discussion about this, IMO. > > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Practical Plone 3 · http://tinyurl.com/practical-plone ___ 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] Where is the position of BlueBream in Zope ecosystem ?
On 2010-01-21, Hermann Himmelbauer wrote: > I think such things indeed matter to some degree: It's interesting that even > people who are not that new (like Baiju or me) can't easily draw a picture of > the Zope ecosystem, for instance neither of us knew that BFG sits on ZCA and > not on ZTK, whereas I would not have distinguished between ZCA and ZTK in the > first place. > > So - if even we have problems understanding, how would things look like for > complete newbies? +1 FWIW I think of the ZCA as: The "abstract concepts that define modern Zope programming" e.g. component, adapter, interface, view, utility, etc. which is most often compared and contrasted with "old style" Zope 2 programming, e.g. acquisition, traversal, etc. As such, I make a pretty big distinction between the ZCA and the rest, e.g. Zope 2, the ZTK, BlueBream, Grok, BFG, Plone et al. The former is a concept, the latter are implementations of that concept, to varying degrees. I don't know or particularly care what packages make up the particular products/frameworks/whatever. (In fact, I find the whole ZTK concept a bit confusing. If the ZTK is just a collection of packages why argue over which packages? Why not declare every damn "Zope-ish" package part of the ZTK? That would include Chris's BFG, which implements CA concepts. So why not? Who cares? :-) We certainly have not reached the goal of helping newcomers understand the Zope ecosystem in any other way to date, IMO.) With that in mind, I can view the ecosystem very much like: http://wiki.zope.org/bluebream/BlueBreamName. But I might draw it like this: # Zope Ecosystem # == # #.--. #|ZCA (abstract concepts) | #| .-. | #| |ZTK (a bunch of Zope-ish packages that may or may not || #| | be useful to you)|| #| | - ------- || #| | | || | | | | ||| #| | |BlueBream|| Grok | | BFG | | Zope2 ||| #| | | || | | | | ||| #| | - ------- || #| | || #| | -- || #| | | repoze.zope2*| || #| | -- || #| `-` | #| | #`--` So I guess the point is, you can draw BFG with a line pointing directly to the ZCA and explicitly avoiding the ZTK, but I'm not buying it, personally ;-) Why? Because I consider BFG and whatever packages it consists of to be part of the general set of tools I may use as a Python/Zope loving web developer. And what's a good name for a set of tools that I may use to build something? Wait for it… a toolkit! Alex P.S. *Merge me back to Zope 2 Hanno, please! > Best Regards, > Hermann > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Practical Plone 3 · http://tinyurl.com/practical-plone ___ 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] New Zope 3 name: BlueBream
On 2010-01-04, Baiju M wrote: > Hi All, > I am proposing to call "Zope 3 - the web frame work" > as "BlueBream". The main use for name is documentation. > But the package named "bluebream" will not provide > any part of framework code by itself. All the framework > code will be in "zope" and "zope.app" namespaces. FWIW, getting in a late vote here: +1. > BTW, the original meaning of "BlueBream" is > same as that of "Zope": > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramis_ballerus Cute! FTR, I will be shortening BlueBream to BB. I agree that the nickname "Bream" is OK, but that the full name should be BlueBream. Lastly I'll say, "We are BlueBream consultants" has a nice ring to it. I.e. it's marketable. ;-) > Regards, > Baiju M > ___ > 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 ) > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Practical Plone 3 · http://tinyurl.com/practical-plone ___ 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] [Announce] BlueBream: Script to setup a Zope project directory
On 2010-01-03, Baiju M wrote: > On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Andreas Jung wrote: >> How is this different from ZopeSkel? > > Well, it's just yet another PasteScript project template. BlueBream > provides a slightly different layout compared to "basic_zope" . Another obvious question (sorry ;-), why not just contribute to ZopeSkel (which is currently in need of some active contributors, IIRC)? > Here are few features: > 1. BlueBream project package includes ZTK + few additional packages > which was part of "Zope 3". > 2. Runnable Buildout > 3. Functional testing enabled by default using z3c.testsetup > 4. Use PasteDeploy > 5. Create a namespace package by default. > To use: > $ easy_install bluebream > $ paster create -t bluebream testproject > $ cd testproject > $ python bootstrap.py > $ ./bin/buidout > $ ./bin/test > $ ./bin/paster serve debug.ini Nice! Can I suggest adding that last bit to the PyPI page? E.g. $ cd testproject $ python bootstrap.py $ ./bin/buidout $ ./bin/test $ ./bin/paster serve debug.ini Also, there are a few installation issues (fixed by running `mkdir -p` by hand): http://pastie.org/765137 http://pastie.org/765140 And runtime issues (I think?): http://pastie.org/765143 Otherwise, it works as expected :-) Alex > Regards, > Baiju M > ___ > 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 ) > --- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Practical Plone 3 · http://tinyurl.com/practical-plone ___ 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] REQUEST vs. request
On 2009-06-17, Martin Aspeli wrote: > REQUEST is a Zope2-ism. When you do self.REQUEST somewhere, you are > actually using acquisition to get this object from the outermost item in > any (most?) acquisition chain: a magic RequestContainer class whose > purpose it is to let you acquire a REQUEST. > > In general, this is a bit icky. You probably should avoid it. > > self.request is not generally available. Rather, it's the most commonly > used name for the request stored on an attribute in a view or viewlet. > These are initialised with a context and a request (and view and viewlet > manager in the case of a viewlet), and normally store those as > self.context and self.request. > > In Zope 2, your views *also* support acquisition, because until Zope > 2.12 at least, they have to in order to have security. So you can do > self.REQUEST on the view, which acquires it from a parent. But this is > magic and you shouldn't do it if you can avoid it. Good explanation, thanks! So in Zope 2.12 we get "z3 style" security? > > Martin > -- Alex Clark · http://aclark.net Buy Practical Plone 3: http://tinyurl.com/practical-plone ___ 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 )
