Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> In order to get to a conclusion:
>>
>> I haven't seen convincing arguments yet *not* to drop the Python 2.4 for
>> new releases of the Zope Toolkit libraries.
>>
>> I'd like to phrase the debate in those terms instead of the reverse,
>>
Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Jürgen Herrmann wrote:
> > ZConfig.SchemaResourceError: import name does not refer to a package
> > Package name: 'relstorage'
> > File name: 'component.xml'
> > Package path: None
>
> I need to make a new release of RelStorage before this will work.
> RelStorage 1.1.3
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:55, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> We've had some more discussions about this and the Plone release
> schedule. The upshot is that if Zope 3/Toolkit drops Python 2.4 support,
> it will effectively render it inaccessible to Plone users for the next
> 12-18 months. We're not comfor
Previously Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:55, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> > We've had some more discussions about this and the Plone release
> > schedule. The upshot is that if Zope 3/Toolkit drops Python 2.4 support,
> > it will effectively render it inaccessible to Plone users for
Summary of messages to the zope-tests list.
Period Mon May 4 12:00:00 2009 UTC to Tue May 5 12:00:00 2009 UTC.
There were 8 messages: 8 from Zope Tests.
Test failures
-
Subject: FAILED (errors=5) : Zope-trunk Python-2.4.6 : Linux
From: Zope Tests
Date: Mon May 4 21:06:02 EDT 2009
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:55, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> We've had some more discussions about this and the Plone release
>> schedule. The upshot is that if Zope 3/Toolkit drops Python 2.4 support,
>> it will effectively render it inaccessible to Plone users for the next
>> 1
On Tuesday 05 May 2009, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> > Since I haven't seen such arguments besides the Plone 3.x related ones,
> > I will amend the zope toolkit decisions about this.
>
> We've had some more discussions about this and the Plone release
> schedule. The upshot is that if Zope 3/Toolkit drop
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>>> In order to get to a conclusion:
>>>
>>> I haven't seen convincing arguments yet *not* to drop the Python 2.4 for
>>> new releases of the Zope Toolkit libraries.
>>>
>>> I'd like to phrase the debate in those terms instead
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
[snip]
> But you can use a lot of the Zope Toolkit with Zope 2.10, which is an
> enormous benefit.
No, you can't, as far as I can tell. You'd have to remove Zope 3
entirely from Zope 2.10, and Plone relies on Zope 3, so this sounds
unfeasible. The burden of evidence is o
Hi there,
I tagged and released Zope 2.12.0 beta 1 today (basically identical
with the latest alpha but it includes ZODB 3.9.0 beta 1).
I will cut an official 2.12 release branch at the time of the beta 2
release (except someone needs the trunk to be open for new developments).
In general: the c
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> [snip]
>> But you can use a lot of the Zope Toolkit with Zope 2.10, which is an
>> enormous benefit.
>
> No, you can't, as far as I can tell. You'd have to remove Zope 3
> entirely from Zope 2.10, and Plone relies on Zope 3, so this sounds
> un
Stephan Richter wrote:
> Plone is using z3c.form. We are currently in the process of releasing
> z3c.form
> 2.0, which has a massive amount of new features, which are very useful. As a
> z3c.form developer I want to stay compatible with the current Plone release,
> because (a) the code gets tes
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> As I pointed out, it is effectively inaccessible for Plone users anyway,
> as Zope 3 is already installed. You *cannot* mix Zope Toolkit and Zope 3
> libraries just like that and expect anything to work.
Why not? We upgrade Zope 3.3 packages to 3.4+ all the time to acce
Hey,
Stephan Richter wrote:
[snip]
> I do think that we should care a lot about the Plone user base. Right now it
> is by far the largest sub-community we have.
I care about the Plone user base, but would you really have said: "okay,
we should not move to Python 2.5 for Zope 3.5, because peopl
Hey,
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> But you can use a lot of the Zope Toolkit with Zope 2.10, which is an
>>> enormous benefit.
>> No, you can't, as far as I can tell. You'd have to remove Zope 3
>> entirely from Zope 2.10, and Plone re
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:07 AM, Martin Aspeli
> wrote:
> Lennart Regebro wrote:
> > Can you expand on this argument, because I don't understand it. Zope
> > 2.10 doesn't stop working because Zope 2.12 no longer supports Python
> > 2.4. And you are not expected to use Zope Toolkit with Zope 2.10,
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>
>> As I pointed out, it is effectively inaccessible for Plone users anyway,
>> as Zope 3 is already installed. You *cannot* mix Zope Toolkit and Zope 3
>> libraries just like that and expect anything to work.
>
> Why not? We upgrade Zope 3.3 packa
Hey,
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> In order to get to a conclusion:
>>
>> I haven't seen convincing arguments yet *not* to drop the Python 2.4 for
>> new releases of the Zope Toolkit libraries.
>>
>> I'd like to phrase the debate in those terms instead of the reverse,
>> bec
Previously Martijn Faassen wrote:
> This is a component developed in the context of the Zope Toolkit (or at
> least post-Zope 3.4). It depends on zope.container, also new. We
> released a backwards compatible zope.app.container (not in the Toolkit)
> which relies on zope.container now for its im
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> What is the date that
> you would feel comfortable about giving up Python 2.5 compatibility in
> Zope Toolkit packages? I'm not leaving this thread without at least
> *some* decision about this. :)
Oops, I meant of course giving up Python 2.4 compatibility. Giving up
P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On May 5, 2009, at 15:58 , Andreas Jung wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I tagged and released Zope 2.12.0 beta 1 today (basically identical
> with the latest alpha but it includes ZODB 3.9.0 beta 1).
I'm trying to install the Zope2 egg (pulles in as a depend
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> What is the date that
>> you would feel comfortable about giving up Python 2.5 compatibility in
>> Zope Toolkit packages? I'm not leaving this thread without at least
>> *some* decision about this. :)
>
> Oops, I meant of course giving up Pytho
Hey,
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
[snip]
> Given those dates the most commonly used Plone version will be based on
> Python 2.4 up until end of next year by the looks of it.
What about implementing the dropping of Python 2.4 compatibility in
september, then? To give you guys a bit more time?
Regard
On 05.05.09 17:13, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>
> On May 5, 2009, at 15:58 , Andreas Jung wrote:
>
> > Hi there,
>
> > I tagged and released Zope 2.12.0 beta 1 today (basically identical
> > with the latest alpha but it includes ZODB 3.9.0 beta 1).
>
> I'm trying to install the Zope2 egg (pulles in as a
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
> On May 5, 2009, at 15:58 , Andreas Jung wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>
>> I tagged and released Zope 2.12.0 beta 1 today (basically identical
>> with the latest alpha but it includes ZODB 3.9.0 beta 1).
>
> I'm trying to install the Zope2 egg (pulles in as a dependency from
>
On 05.05.09 17:17, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>
>> On May 5, 2009, at 15:58 , Andreas Jung wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>
>>> I tagged and released Zope 2.12.0 beta 1 today (basically identical
>>> with the latest alpha but it includes ZODB 3.9.0 beta 1)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On May 5, 2009, at 17:23 , Andreas Jung wrote:
> Unfortunately I can't get SVN 1.5 get working on my Mac.
SVN 1.5 from Fink works perfectly fine here.
jens
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkoAXQYACgkQRAx
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> So I see two responses for Plone developers:
>
> * they know that they need new versions of zope.app.container and
> zope.app.component too and require people to upgrade those too. This
> might work fairly well, but does require the upgrade of more than just a
> *few*
On 05.05.09 17:36, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>
> On May 5, 2009, at 17:23 , Andreas Jung wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately I can't get SVN 1.5 get working on my Mac.
>
> SVN 1.5 from Fink works perfectly fine here.
Macports seems to provide only 1.6 - I see no option for reverting to
1.5 with Macports.
Andr
Andreas Jung wrote:
> On 05.05.09 17:36, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>> On May 5, 2009, at 17:23 , Andreas Jung wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately I can't get SVN 1.5 get working on my Mac.
>> SVN 1.5 from Fink works perfectly fine here.
>
> Macports seems to provide only 1.6 - I see no option for reverting to
On 5/5/09 11:16 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> [snip]
>> Given those dates the most commonly used Plone version will be based on
>> Python 2.4 up until end of next year by the looks of it.
>
> What about implementing the dropping of Python 2.4 compatibility in
> se
Am Dienstag 05 Mai 2009 16:46:03 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
> Hey,
>
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
> > Martijn Faassen wrote:
> >> In order to get to a conclusion:
> >>
> >> I haven't seen convincing arguments yet *not* to drop the Python 2.4 for
> >> new releases of the Zope Toolkit libraries.
> >>
> >>
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Hermann Himmelbauer wrote:
> Am Dienstag 05 Mai 2009 16:46:03 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
>> Hey,
>>
>> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> > Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> >> In order to get to a conclusion:
>> >>
>> >> I haven't seen convincing arguments yet *not* to drop the Pytho
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Maybe:
>
> port deactivate subversion
>
> port install -f subvers...@1.5.6
I seem to remember on my Macs I just built from source.
/me hates svn more and more as time goes on...
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
- http:/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:55, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>> We've had some more discussions about this and the Plone release
>>> schedule. The upshot is that if Zope 3/Toolkit drops Python 2.4
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
>> Plone is using z3c.form. We are currently in the process of releasing
>> z3c.form
>> 2.0, which has a massive amount of new features, which are very useful. As a
>> z3c.form developer I want to st
Am 05.05.2009 um 17:51 schrieb Hanno Schlichting:
> Andreas Jung wrote:
>> On 05.05.09 17:36, Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>>> On May 5, 2009, at 17:23 , Andreas Jung wrote:
>>>
Unfortunately I can't get SVN 1.5 get working on my Mac.
>>> SVN 1.5 from Fink works perfectly fine here.
>>
>> Macports se
Previously Chris Withers wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> > Maybe:
> >
> > port deactivate subversion
> >
> > port install -f subvers...@1.5.6
>
> I seem to remember on my Macs I just built from source.
>
> /me hates svn more and more as time goes on...
The problem here is setuptools, not s
Tres Seaver wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> As a side note, we just started the community discussion about moving at
>> least to Zope 2.11 / 3.4 for Plone in a release by the end of this year.
>> This should take away some of the burden with Zope 3.3, but will not
>> change the Python 2.4 situ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>> As a side note, we just started the community discussion about moving at
>>> least to Zope 2.11 / 3.4 for Plone in a release by the end of this year.
>>> This should take awa
Tres Seaver wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> Tres Seaver wrote:
>> Zope 2.12 with its many changes is seen as too risky to introduce into
>> our current stable series or into any release that aims to be released
>> as final by the end of this year.
>
> For what value of "risky"? If you are th
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 13:27, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> But you can use a lot of the Zope Toolkit with Zope 2.10, which is an
> enormous benefit. If that was not possible a lot of the things people
> want to do with Plone would not be possible.
Let's be clear here: Do you mean that you need, in P
Am Tue, 05 May 2009 16:22:44 +0200 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
[...]
> I care about the Plone user base, but would you really have said: "okay,
> we should not move to Python 2.5 for Zope 3.5, because people on Plone
> which is still based on Zope 3.3 may want to use bits from Zope 3.5?"
Unfortunatel
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 15:30, Stephan Richter
wrote:
> [...] I think that dropping Python 2.4 support in general will actually
> massively increase the compatibility burden elsewhere.
That would indeed be bad, and in practice remove the benefit of
dropping 2.4 support.
> Plone is using z3c.form.
Am Tue, 05 May 2009 15:45:31 +0200 schrieb Martijn Faassen:
[...]
> As I pointed out, it is effectively inaccessible for Plone users anyway,
> as Zope 3 is already installed. You *cannot* mix Zope Toolkit and Zope 3
> libraries just like that and expect anything to work.
I dont expect them to work
Hey,
Chris McDonough wrote:
> On 5/5/09 11:16 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> Given those dates the most commonly used Plone version will be based on
>>> Python 2.4 up until end of next year by the looks of it.
>> What about implementing the dropping of Python
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 23:51, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> Were this some other project, I'd ask the Plone folks or some other group
>> that
>> cares about Zope packages under 2.4 to set up a buildbot that tested "the
>> ZTK"
>> under Python 2.4. Then I'd ask the same folks to to pay attention to
Chris McDonough wrote:
> Were this some other project, I'd ask the Plone folks or some other group
> that
> cares about Zope packages under 2.4 to set up a buildbot that tested "the
> ZTK"
> under Python 2.4. Then I'd ask the same folks to to pay attention to the
> buildbot output and fix is
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Personally I don't care if the ZTK doesn't officially support Python 2.4
> anymore, as long as nobody will try to actively remove Python 2.4
> support. For my part I'd be happy to take care of the BBB support for
> those packages I use.
I think this would be acceptable
On 05.05.09 21:08, Michael Howitz wrote:
>
>> Maybe:
>>
>> port deactivate subversion
>>
>> port install -f subvers...@1.5.6
>>
That did not work.
> This does not work if this version wasn't already built before and
> archived. Putting built versions into archive is switched off by
> defa
50 matches
Mail list logo
