Re: [Zope3-dev] The vision thing

2006-03-06 Thread Stefane Fermigier
Benji York wrote:
 Geoff Davis wrote:
 * What can we learn from Rails / Django / TurboGears?

 Fun presentation along those lines:
 http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov

 One of the best put together movies I've seen.

Yeah, really awesome! Should have won the Oscar! ;)

Another relevant link:

http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2006/03/04/zend-framework-is-out/

i.e. the PHP community trying to imitate us (+ an Eclipse-based ide, for
which there is also an interesting proposa, cf.
http://blogs.nuxeo.com/sections/blogs/fermigier/2006_02_13_about-the-eclipse 
- but unfortunately not much traction).

  S.

-- 
Stéfane Fermigier, Tel: +33 (0)6 63 04 12 77 (mobile).
Nuxeo Collaborative Portal Server: http://www.nuxeo.com/cps
Gestion de contenu web / portail collaboratif / groupware / open source!

___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: traceback when running tests for zope.app.component

2006-03-06 Thread Benji York

jürgen Kartnaller wrote:

Benji York wrote:

I emailed the committer Friday about this, but no fix has been
forthcoming, so I reverted the offending revisions.  Hopefully a revised
version can be reapplied soon.


Still the same problem after your revert !


The tests pass on my box and on all the buildbot machines (and they 
didn't before).  Perhaps you're seeing a different problem.  I didn't 
compare the tracebacks to be sure.

--
Benji York
Senior Software Engineer
Zope Corporation
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] Re: [Zope-dev] Two visions

2006-03-06 Thread Martijn Faassen

Jim Fulton wrote:
[snip]
I wasn't trying to define app server.  I was describing the Zope app 
server.


As long as you realize you do risk confusion even by saying 'Zope app 
server'. To me, Zope 3 is an app server, so when you say 'the Zope app 
server' will include its functionalities too.


Regards,

Martijn
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



[Zope3-dev] Re: traceback when running tests for zope.app.component

2006-03-06 Thread j.kartnaller

Benji York wrote:

jürgen Kartnaller wrote:

Benji York wrote:

I emailed the committer Friday about this, but no fix has been
forthcoming, so I reverted the offending revisions.  Hopefully a revised
version can be reapplied soon.


Still the same problem after your revert !


The tests pass on my box and on all the buildbot machines (and they 
didn't before).  Perhaps you're seeing a different problem.  I didn't 
compare the tracebacks to be sure.


The traceback only occurs when running the test for zope.app.component :

python test.py --package=zope.app.component

A full test runs without problems.

Jürgen

___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



[Zope3-dev] Re: traceback when running tests for zope.app.component

2006-03-06 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

j.kartnaller wrote:
 Benji York wrote:
 
 jürgen Kartnaller wrote:

 Benji York wrote:

 I emailed the committer Friday about this, but no fix has been
 forthcoming, so I reverted the offending revisions.  Hopefully a
 revised
 version can be reapplied soon.


 Still the same problem after your revert !


 The tests pass on my box and on all the buildbot machines (and they
 didn't before).  Perhaps you're seeing a different problem.  I didn't
 compare the tracebacks to be sure.
 
 
 The traceback only occurs when running the test for zope.app.component :
 
 python test.py --package=zope.app.component
 
 A full test runs without problems.

A trunk checkout fails for me with the same traceback when run with that
command line.


Tres.
- --
===
Tres Seaver  +1 202-558-7113  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Palladion Software   Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEDFP2+gerLs4ltQ4RAkyOAJ9kIr6yWO7iK9sAkDOA8LxOTmHhdACfV+FU
bt9FlEcGL/TCSBWQYzXT3kU=
=w0Hz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] The vision thing

2006-03-06 Thread Andrew Sawyers
On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 09:45 +, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
 Benji York wrote:
  Geoff Davis wrote:
  * What can we learn from Rails / Django / TurboGears?
 
  Fun presentation along those lines:
  http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov

I saw that last week from some internal folks at my work.  While I
despise TTW development, I will admit this presentation changed my
opinion some on the audience whom might find it useful.  Now if we can
just make it so whatever they do TTW can be replicated as a base FS
product for easy migration to the *right way*  :)

Would be a good video to highlight on zope.org (when it's done).

Andrew
 
  One of the best put together movies I've seen.
 
 Yeah, really awesome! Should have won the Oscar! ;)
 
 Another relevant link:
 
 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2006/03/04/zend-framework-is-out/
 
 i.e. the PHP community trying to imitate us (+ an Eclipse-based ide, for
 which there is also an interesting proposa, cf.
 http://blogs.nuxeo.com/sections/blogs/fermigier/2006_02_13_about-the-eclipse 
 - but unfortunately not much traction).
 
   S.
 

___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] Zope Eggs

2006-03-06 Thread Jeff Shell
Cool effort.

One thing that I noticed in Rails when I downloaded it this weekend
was how you installed plug-ins. Very easy. There are various 'sources'
that can be loaded up which work, I assume, in a similar manner to how
you can point easy_install at a web page and tell it 'find links'.

To install a plugin into an application instance (similar to a Zope
instance home), it's just an effort of:

$ script/plugin install acts_as_taggable

The plugin is found, and installed in the instance home equivalent.
This uses 'gems' under the hood from the looks of it, and adds in the
knowledge of a Rails application layout. It was pretty gratifying,
being able to start adding in functionality so easily.

I think a good goal would be to have something like this: A Zope
instance home aware package/egg loader, so that in an instance home
you could add in packages like this:

$ bin/package install zc.catalog
$ bin/package install hurry


On 3/5/06, Nathan R. Yergler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 During the Zope3 sprint following PyCon, Paul and I, with Jim's
 guidance,  began work on exploring how Zope can utilize eggs and be
 packaged using eggs.  Since we're still experimenting with how eggs
 will be used, I wrote a script, zpkgegg, which reads the zpkg
 configuration information for a package and generates a standard
 setup.py from which an egg and vanilla sdist can be generated.

 You can find the script in subversion in the projectsupport project.
 For a brief overview of how the script is used, see README.txt (in
 http://svn.zope.org/projectsupport/trunk/src/zpkgegg/).  The eggs
 generated by zpkgegg do not attempt to distinguish between runtime,
 testing or development dependencies, so almost all packages will
 want zope.testing.  README.txt contains a brief example of how to
 point easy_install at the appropriate folders so that easy_install can
 resolve the dependencies.

 Note that at this point we're still experimenting with how we'll use
 eggs, so suggestions, feedback and comments are welcome.

 Thanks,

 Nathan R. Yergler
 ___
 Zope3-dev mailing list
 Zope3-dev@zope.org
 Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/eucci.group%40gmail.com




--
Jeff Shell
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] Zope Eggs

2006-03-06 Thread Nathan R. Yergler
 I think a good goal would be to have something like this: A Zope
 instance home aware package/egg loader, so that in an instance home
 you could add in packages like this:

 $ bin/package install zc.catalog
 $ bin/package install hurry

This wouldn't be difficult to implement (at least in a simple way) --
easy_install (provided by setuptools) does downloads from package
sources, and we experimented at the sprint with wrapping that
functionality in order to bootstrap eggs.



 On 3/5/06, Nathan R. Yergler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  During the Zope3 sprint following PyCon, Paul and I, with Jim's
  guidance,  began work on exploring how Zope can utilize eggs and be
  packaged using eggs.  Since we're still experimenting with how eggs
  will be used, I wrote a script, zpkgegg, which reads the zpkg
  configuration information for a package and generates a standard
  setup.py from which an egg and vanilla sdist can be generated.
 
  You can find the script in subversion in the projectsupport project.
  For a brief overview of how the script is used, see README.txt (in
  http://svn.zope.org/projectsupport/trunk/src/zpkgegg/).  The eggs
  generated by zpkgegg do not attempt to distinguish between runtime,
  testing or development dependencies, so almost all packages will
  want zope.testing.  README.txt contains a brief example of how to
  point easy_install at the appropriate folders so that easy_install can
  resolve the dependencies.
 
  Note that at this point we're still experimenting with how we'll use
  eggs, so suggestions, feedback and comments are welcome.
 
  Thanks,
 
  Nathan R. Yergler
  ___
  Zope3-dev mailing list
  Zope3-dev@zope.org
  Unsub: 
  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/eucci.group%40gmail.com
 
 


 --
 Jeff Shell

___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Use ConfigParser for High-Level Configuration

2006-03-06 Thread Fred Drake
On 3/6/06, Dieter Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 In modern Zope[2] schemas, there is a general purpose abstract type
 precisely for this kind of extensions.

When Tres and I added this, we planned specifically to see how it was
received by the Zope 2 community.  If people liked the way this was
done, it could be added to Zope 3.

That said, I don't think Jim's concerns are limited to the Zope
configuration schema, but extend to configurations that do not
necessarily involve the Zope application server at all.

It may be that a better foundation schema is something to experiment
with, especially for non-Zope applications.

I don't expect to have any time for this in the near future.


  -Fred

--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.fdrake at gmail.com
There is no wealth but life. --John Ruskin
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Movies, audiences, wasted effort, was Re: [Zope3-dev] The vision thing

2006-03-06 Thread Paul Winkler
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 04:04:48PM -0500, Benji York wrote:
 Geoff Davis wrote:
 * What can we learn from Rails / Django / TurboGears?
 
 Fun presentation along those lines:
   http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov
 
 One of the best put together movies I've seen.

Really interesting stuff.
I was struck by the way he presents zope/plone.  He gives it a winning
fun factor score for hello world... by doing through-the-web
development.  So he says Zope [2] rocks precisely because of features
that many of us have been largely ignoring and advising against for a
couple years now.  The kind of thing that the built-in zope 2 tutorial
shows you how to do.

Why is Zope 2 TTW fun?

 - No restarts

 - No configuration

That's certainly food for thought.

The sample app demos were also interesting...
he kinda glosses over what exactly was the full zope/plone stack
and how he did it, but since he generated a Plone content-like app from
a UML model it's not hard to guess :)

Notably it was the kind of app that sits squarely in the single-developer-
in-a-hurry space. The I just want some forms to save some data and I
don't want to care how it works space.  The space where, as Jim
keeps saying, zope 2 traditionally excelled and Plone lives today.

A similar app could've been written pretty quickly in Zope 3 by writing
a schema and using browser:addform, browser:editform, and
browser:schemadisplay.  It would be interesting to see how that would go
in the movie.  I suspect that the movie author (named Sean Kelly i
think?) would've complained about the xml sit-ups and the numerous
server restarts.  (In the middle of the movie he gives a link to his
article at http://www.developer.com/xml/article.php/3583081 which
includes the line The fad of applications using XML for their
configuration files is dismaying, to say the least...)

This is the kind of guy for whom TTW development really is compelling.
Watching the hello world section reminded me of when I used to really
enjoy doing that stuff.

But there are some important things left out of that story.
Why did I stop enjoying TTW work? Like a lot of Zope 2 developers:

* I needed my work to live in CVS.  ZODB history and undo isn't good enough
  as version control.

* I needed to write tests that I can run without having a real ZODB and
  without starting up a server.
  
* I needed a sane way to deploy software from dev to staging and from
  staging to production. ZSyncer is fine for what it does, but it too is
  a poor substitute for version control, shell scripts, make, et al.

* The unix shell still beats the pants off the ZMI as a complete
  working environment (even with ExternalEditor, the find tab, etc.)
 
* I got tired of bouncing between restricted and unrestricted code.
  I want to live in unrestricted code as much as possible.

Ultimately the zope 2 restart time started to become less of a problem
than dealing with all those problems when working TTW.

For CMF development, I settled on a pretty nice compromise: templates
and scripts in filesystem directory views, with the scripts doing
only view-related glue.  This got me files on the filesystem and in CVS,
and no restarts when tweaking UI. The scripts are easily testable using
CMFTestCase. Pretty nice way to work. I still have to deal with
some restricted code, but I'm mostly resigned to that.

In Zope 3, we take restarts and filesystem-only development for granted,
because it's intended specifically for the audience that I'm a member
of...  developers who have those concerns.

I'm hoping to see a similarly interactive, yet long-term-sane, 
working style evolve for in zope 3.  Maybe we'll get there
with Persisent Modules and fssync. 

If there's a moral to this story, it's this:
Scaffolding that gets you up and running with a minimum of
fuss is a great thing.  Rapid interactive and iterative development
is also a great thing.  But if you can't easily transition from there to
more complex apps that are still maintainable, it sucks. It's irritating
to have to throw away some of your knowledge and completely replace it
with new ways of thinking; it's better if the new knowledge strictly
supplements the old.  It's worse than irritating to have to throw away
your work and rebuild it from scratch; it's better if your new work can
cleanly leverage the old.

Put another way, if we consider Jim's first two audiences, how do we
teach a single person to move from i don't want to have to care to 
zope zen master / SVN contributor with minimal wasted effort along the
way? 

Today I don't know if there's a clear coherent story to be told there,
even for zope 2. If there was... wow, that would be a great.

Sorry if I haven't really said anything new.

-- 

Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] RFC: Use ConfigParser for High-Level Configuration

2006-03-06 Thread Chris Withers

Jim Fulton wrote:


At:

  http://dev.zope.org/Zope3/UseConfigParserForHighLevelConfiguration


Sorry, working offline, can't check, hope I haven't missed anything 
crucial :-S



Is a proposal for using ConfigParser, rather than ZConfig for high-level
configuration.

Comments welcome.


This smacks of re-invention for the sake of it. I happen to like ZConfig 
 a lot. The way it's used in Zope 2 is a little unpleasant, admittedly, 
but I think it makes a fine configuration language.


The xml required for the schema is pretty trivial if you're coming from 
zcmhell...


I must be missing some big reasons why you'd want to use an inferior 
config language and rewrite a big chunk of working, battle tested 
software, but I guess that's in the proposal..


Anyway, a big -1 from me, especially given the backwards compatibility 
issues prople like myself, with MailingLogger and a number of 
ZConfig-based, and Dieter, with his NNTP server and doubtless other 
things, will face.


Fred, FWIW, I was really really happy to see that generic section go 
into the schema, I just haven't had a chance to use it yet...


cheers,

Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope  Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: Movies, audiences, wasted effort, was Re: [Zope3-dev] The vision thing

2006-03-06 Thread Paul Winkler
On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 05:13:57PM -0700, Jeff Shell wrote:
 On 3/6/06, Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  A similar app could've been written pretty quickly in Zope 3 by writing
  a schema and using browser:addform, browser:editform, and
  browser:schemadisplay.  It would be interesting to see how that would go
  in the movie.  I suspect that the movie author (named Sean Kelly i
  think?) would've complained about the xml sit-ups and the numerous
  server restarts.
 
 Those are bad options anyways. They do not have growth potential
 either, as you then have to make the conceptual leap from something
 magically generated by this XML declaration into how do I customize
 what happens on edit?

Actually I agree with you. Dynamic scaffolding has the
same problems I was complaining about re. TTW development:
it does a bunch of magic that you have to understand and know how to do
from scratch the moment you want to go beyond it.  In that paragraph I
was only trying to fit zope 3 into the kinds of things done in that
movie; some of his other examples are pretty magical too.  I write this
UML model and presto, I get all this with zero lines of code, wow neat.

What I'd really like is something like what you say later on:

 This is an area where Rails is particularly strong. I'm normally not a
 fan of code generation. But their tool generates just-enough. It's
 code you can actually understand and start building from, and a quick
 run to the api docs they have online is usually all that's needed to
 start understanding the code you're looking at. The code their tool
 generates runs basically what you see if you have it dynamically
 providing 'scaffolding', so the conceptual difference between the
 automatically generated and what it gives you out of the box is pretty
 small.

OK, so what if we had a code generator that would read
some browser:addform/editform/schemadisplay directives and spit out some
functionally equivalent code (python, zcml, and zpt) that you could just
start using and editing?  I think that might be pretty handy.

 I really like the concept of through the web tweaking and
 manipulation. But I'm sick of templates and scripts. 

I'm not quite sick of templates yet, but I am sick of scripts.
I still use them in CMF because they give me a convenient place
to do what I described: view-related glue that I can tweak
without restart.

-- 

Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com



Re: [Zope3-dev] Two visions

2006-03-06 Thread Jake

On Feb 28, 2006, at 7:39 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
So, my proposal would be to tone down the vision to what we have  
already: a co-evolving Zope 3 and Zope 2, with Zope 2 following and  
Zope 3 leading (or Zope 2 driving Zope 3 forward, however you want  
to see it). No renaming necessary. No change of course necessary.  
Zope 2 can stick to Zope 2 features as long as necessary so there's  
no rush to replicate Zope 2 functionality in Zope 3 any time soon.  
At the same time, Zope 2 requirements can drive the evolution of  
Zope 3.


I know I sound conservative here, but I'm actually happy with the  
way things are working now. Let's not fix what isn't broken. We can  
make incremental steps to making it better, and I'm glad people are  
starting to understand the ideas behind Five, but I don't see the  
need for a change of direction.


Regards,

Martijn


+1

Jake

http://www.ZopeZone.com
Zoping for the rest of us
___
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com