On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 22:38 +0300, Marius Gedminas wrote:
> By the way, the usual way to run tests in the Zope-3-land is to use
> bin/test rather than setup.py test. It uses a slightly different test
> runner that uses a slightly different method of getting the test
> description and therefore hi
On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 19:44 -0400, Fred Drake wrote:
> Can you provide the traceback?
It's in the attached file at the bottom. I didn't put it in the body of
the email 'cause the total output is ~14kB and includes *all* the output
from running the tests (so it also shows the last good test that
I'm getting a Traceback when running `python setup.py test` for
ZConfig-2.5.1 as per the changelog. Attached is the output, let me know
how I can help. I'm not a proficient python programmer; however, I'm
more than willing to learn more.
--Tim
__
On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 08:05 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:
> In general we want to get rid of 3rd-party packages we don't want to
> maintain on our own.
That's perfectly sane :) There is no sustainable reason to lug around
some other project's code in yours in the Open Source world.
> Right now we
On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 20:09 +0100, Andreas Jung wrote:
> Hi,
>
> speaking as the Zope 2 release manager: I am strongly opposed against
> splitting Zope yourself into different packages and modules. With Zope
> 2 depending from various Zope 3 packages (roughly 80-90) we have
> already the situatio
As the subject implies, I'm working on a package for Fedora. I've come
across some missing dependencies, and some that are different versions.
Because of the way that Python packages are put together (shared library
environment), I'm trying to strip out everything that is not Zope
specific (e.g. m
