Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-06 Thread Jens Vagelpohl


On 6 Nov 2005, at 03:41, Chris McDonough wrote:

  "configure"
also allows you to install multiple times from a "pristine" source
directory without changing the source directory, which I (and others,
because they've told me they do) make use of.


I use that a lot myself.

-1 for removing it from me as well.

jens


___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce

http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-06 Thread Andreas Jung



--On 5. November 2005 21:41:54 -0500 Chris McDonough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:





The makefile is a wrapper around setup.py as well as mkzopeinstance.  It
is also capable of creating release tarballs.

-1 on removing configure / make / make install dance unless there is
some reason to do so other than not being "pythonic".



Also -1 from me. There was little need in the past to touch the script so 
it not a big burden from the maintenance point of view. It would be nice to 
have something similar Python-based as a replacement but that's nice2have. 
I can live perfectly with current solution.


Andreas

pgpvIvEzXZp6Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Chris McDonough
On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 12:14 -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> Lennart Regebro wrote:
> > On 11/4/05, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> >>Having said that, I don't really like the configure/make farce myself.
> > 
> > 
> > Farce?
> 
> We aren't running the real configure.  

If you mean autotools, that's right, but only because we don't really
need it.  Compiling Python has already done all the dirty work for us,
so configure's main job is to find a suitable Python, which it does.
Configure also checks the Python it finds for large file support and
Python's zlib module, which is required by some bits of Zope but not in
every system-shipped Python.  These things might seem silly to
developers but they've saved a lot of new users from pain.  "configure"
also allows you to install multiple times from a "pristine" source
directory without changing the source directory, which I (and others,
because they've told me they do) make use of.

> We aren't really using make.

Actually we are.  We create a makefile, which is run by make when you
type "make" (no different than if autotools had created the makefile).

> We're just using make as a wrapper around setup.py.

The makefile is a wrapper around setup.py as well as mkzopeinstance.  It
is also capable of creating release tarballs.

-1 on removing configure / make / make install dance unless there is
some reason to do so other than not being "pythonic".

- C



___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Morten W. Petersen
> I wasn't arguing that configure/make was hard to use.  I'm arguing
> that it's something extra to maintain and is just silly.
> 
> It's main benefit is that it leverages a familiar pattern, but
> I'm not convinced that it's worth it. Also, as tools like rpm and
> deb become more widely used, I'm not sure how familar the configure/make
> dance is.  Other than Python and Zope, I never use configure/make anymore.

My experience is that .rpm and .deb packages are poorly maintained, so
if someone is serious about using Zope and related products, downloading
and installing from source is the only way to go.

We also have tools internally that depend on the configure/make dance,
and I'm sure others who put up a lot of Zope instances do as well..  :)

-Morten
begin:vcard
fn:Morten Petersen
n:Petersen;Morten
org:Nidelven IT
adr:;;Postboks 923;Trondheim;;7409;Norway
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Project Manager
tel;work:+47 45 44 00 69
tel;cell:+47 45 44 00 69
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.nidelven-it.no
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Fred Drake
On 11/5/05, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's main benefit is that it leverages a familiar pattern, but
> I'm not convinced that it's worth it. Also, as tools like rpm and
> deb become more widely used, I'm not sure how familar the configure/make
> dance is.  Other than Python and Zope, I never use configure/make anymore.

I think more and more people never have to build from source.  There's
little I build from source these days, and I'm generally happy to
build myself.  I think the only things I build are things I'm actually
contributing to myself, whether it be for work or volunteering on open
source projects.  I don't even build my own TeX tools any more.  :-)

Also, configure/make is only familiar in the Unix world; most
installations appearantly are on Windows boxes using the binary
installer.  The importance of the familiar dance just isn't very
significant any more.


  -Fred

--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
"Society attacks early, when the individual is helpless." --B.F. Skinner
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Jim Fulton

Andreas Jung wrote:



--On 4. November 2005 11:27:10 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Most people who download Zope 2 are not Python programmers. Many of them
become Python programmers later.  I think this is a big part of Zope 2's
value proposition that we haven't matched in Zope 3 yet.

Having said that, I don't really like the configure/make farce myself.
I'd be happy to get rid of it.  I'm also happy to defer to the vocal
majority.  Maybe it's worth revisiting this, which is why the provocative
subject. :)



Unless you have time enough I would keep it :-)


Time enough for what?  configure/make is just extra maintenance
burden.

> From my experience using

configure was never a problem


It was a problem this week. :)

> - neither for newbies nor advanced Zope
users. People unable to run "configure; make" are also likely unable to 
run any other kind of command to perform the same task.


I wasn't arguing that configure/make was hard to use.  I'm arguing
that it's something extra to maintain and is just silly.

It's main benefit is that it leverages a familiar pattern, but
I'm not convinced that it's worth it. Also, as tools like rpm and
deb become more widely used, I'm not sure how familar the configure/make
dance is.  Other than Python and Zope, I never use configure/make anymore.

Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce

http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Jim Fulton

Lennart Regebro wrote:

On 11/4/05, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Having said that, I don't really like the configure/make farce myself.



Farce?


We aren't running the real configure.  We aren't really using make.
We're just using make as a wrapper around setup.py.




I'd be happy to get rid of it.  I'm also happy to defer to the vocal
majority.  Maybe it's worth revisiting this, which is why the provocative
subject. :)



I read through this post and I don't grok what the suggested alternative is.


Use the standard Python mechanism for installing things, for example, in
a checkout:

  python setup.py build_ext -i

Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce

http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Fred Drake
On 11/5/05, Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The usual setup.py from distutils to make it more pythonic.

The install.py in the root of the distribution is actually a
conventional setup.py.  Would it be helpful to keep the setup.py name?
 We renamed it to encourage the configure/make dance, but that doesn't
seem particularly helpful to me.

(It would also simplify the zpkg implementation just a tiny bit to use
the setup.py. name.)


  -Fred

--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
"Society attacks early, when the individual is helpless." --B.F. Skinner
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Tino Wildenhain
Am Samstag, den 05.11.2005, 13:23 +0100 schrieb Lennart Regebro:
> On 11/4/05, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Having said that, I don't really like the configure/make farce myself.
> 
> Farce?
> 
> > I'd be happy to get rid of it.  I'm also happy to defer to the vocal
> > majority.  Maybe it's worth revisiting this, which is why the provocative
> > subject. :)
> 
> I read through this post and I don't grok what the suggested alternative is.
> Could someone summarize?

The usual setup.py from distutils to make it more pythonic.

--Tino.

___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Andreas Jung



--On 4. November 2005 11:27:10 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Most people who download Zope 2 are not Python programmers. Many of them
become Python programmers later.  I think this is a big part of Zope 2's
value proposition that we haven't matched in Zope 3 yet.

Having said that, I don't really like the configure/make farce myself.
I'd be happy to get rid of it.  I'm also happy to defer to the vocal
majority.  Maybe it's worth revisiting this, which is why the provocative
subject. :)



Unless you have time enough I would keep it :-) From my experience using 
configure was never a problem - neither for newbies nor advanced Zope 
users. People unable to run "configure; make" are also likely unable to run 
any other kind of command to perform the same task.


-aj


pgpGfWH6agHOo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


Re: Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-05 Thread Lennart Regebro
On 11/4/05, Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Having said that, I don't really like the configure/make farce myself.

Farce?

> I'd be happy to get rid of it.  I'm also happy to defer to the vocal
> majority.  Maybe it's worth revisiting this, which is why the provocative
> subject. :)

I read through this post and I don't grok what the suggested alternative is.
Could someone summarize?

--
Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo http://www.nuxeo.com/
CPS Content Management http://www.cps-project.org/
___
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 )


Get rid of configure/make? (was Re: [Zope-dev] Re: SVN: Zope/trunk/ Merge philikon-zope32-integration branch. Basically, this branch entails:)

2005-11-04 Thread Jim Fulton

Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:

Jim Fulton wrote:


What changes are those? A fresh Zope trunk checkout works for me. Here's
what I did:

 $ svn co svn+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/repos/main/Zope/trunk
Zope-trunk
 $ cd Zope-trunk
 $ ./configure
 $ make

That worked for me (though I usually don't do the configure; make dance,
but just do an in-place build with python setup.py build -i; see also
below).


You used to have to use "make instance" or "make inplace" to run the tests.
These make commands no longer work.

make inplace could probably be fixed by making it an alias for make build,
since builds now seem to be in place.



Good idea.



And I didn't manage to install Zope trunk to a different location.
That seems to be completely screwed up.


"Not supported anymore" is the right wording here. Basically, the
"configure; make; make install" dance is going to go away for an SVN
checkout. A simple Makefile as we have it in Zope 3 that simply provides
shortcuts for in-place builds will probably replace it.



I don't think that you or I have the authority to decide this.



You're quite right, I don't. I don't know what made me write this in
indicative. Sorry for that. When Fred and I brainstormed about which
implications a zpkg-based build for Zope 2 had, not being able to
install out-of-place was one. Therefore the above paragraph should
rather be read as a fact description, not an edict. IOW, rather than
saying we're not going to support it anymore, I should really have said
that the *current setup* doesn't support it which doesn't mean we can't
bring it back.



We're not even sure if the configure dance makes sense for a release
tarball. The only benefit of the ./configure script is that it
(presumably) chooses the right Python for you, which isn't always what
you want, anyways.



At least I do ./configure --with-python=... more than
half of the times. So I could just call python setup.py install with
whatever Python I want in the first place.


It also lets you specify an install prefix.



python setup.py install --home=prefix let's you do that too.



More importantly, it is a familiar model for unix systems.



True. It is an unfamiliar model for Python software, though. Anyways, I
don't think the ./configure script is the issue right now and I
certainly don't feel strongly about it.


Most people who download Zope 2 are not Python programmers. Many of them
become Python programmers later.  I think this is a big part of Zope 2's
value proposition that we haven't matched in Zope 3 yet.

Having said that, I don't really like the configure/make farce myself.
I'd be happy to get rid of it.  I'm also happy to defer to the vocal
majority.  Maybe it's worth revisiting this, which is why the provocative
subject. :)

Jim

--
Jim Fulton   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Python Powered!
CTO  (540) 361-1714http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com   http://www.zope.org
___
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 )