Hi,
While porting one ZTK app to Python 3 I discovered the following
problems with zope.security:
1) There was a package zope.app.security, which, along with zope.app
baggage provided security declarations for BTrees and PersistentDict,
PersistentList. They were in a separate file,
On Thursday, February 14, 2013 03:42:06 PM Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/14/2013 03:15 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
The work to create a compatible pure-Python proxy is partly done (I
added tests for all the features of the C version I could discover).
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/08/2013 02:18 PM, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Thursday, February 14, 2013 03:42:06 PM Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
On 02/14/2013 03:15 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
The work to create a compatible pure-Python
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/13/2013 05:02 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
On 02/13/2013 11:04 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
On 02/12/2013 10:47 PM, Stephan Richter wrote:
I saw you finished test coverage tonight for zope.security. What
is your timeline to do the port to Python 3?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/14/2013 03:15 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
The work to create a compatible pure-Python proxy is partly done (I
added tests for all the features of the C version I could discover).
The version I have in my sandbox doesn't pass all those tests, so I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/12/2013 10:47 PM, Stephan Richter wrote:
I saw you finished test coverage tonight for zope.security. What is
your timeline to do the port to Python 3? Our efforts are blocked
until we get zope.security going. We would be willing to take a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/13/2013 11:04 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
On 02/12/2013 10:47 PM, Stephan Richter wrote:
I saw you finished test coverage tonight for zope.security. What is
your timeline to do the port to Python 3? Our efforts are blocked
until we get
On 02/11/2013 03:36 PM, Stephan Richter wrote:
Hi Tres (and everyone else reading along),
as you are probably aware, zope.security is a package that blocks a
lot of other packages from being ported. I just checked out the
coverage on Github and it looks like you are making good
Hi everyone,
I was just about to start porting zope.security using the SVN version, when I
noticed it is already on Github and Tres has even worked on it today. So 2
things:
1. Can we delete the contents of zope.security on svn.zope.org?
2. Can we enable checkin messages for all moved
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Stephan Richter
stephan.rich...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I was just about to start porting zope.security using the SVN version, when I
noticed it is already on Github and Tres has even worked on it today. So 2
things:
1. Can we delete the contents of
On Monday, February 11, 2013 03:19:54 PM Jim Fulton wrote:
1. Can we delete the contents of zope.security on svn.zope.org?
Please remove the contents of trunk and add a MOVED_TO_GITHUB file in
trunk and in the project root with the git repo url.
When that's done, I'll make the project
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Stephan Richter
stephan.rich...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 11, 2013 03:19:54 PM Jim Fulton wrote:
1. Can we delete the contents of zope.security on svn.zope.org?
Please remove the contents of trunk and add a MOVED_TO_GITHUB file in
trunk and in the
On Monday, February 11, 2013 03:37:17 PM Jim Fulton wrote:
It seems to be readonly already, so I cannot remove the files.
Sorry. Fixed. Can you try again please?
All done.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Entrepreneur and Software Geek
Google me. Zope Stephan Richter
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Stephan Richter
stephan.rich...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, February 11, 2013 03:37:17 PM Jim Fulton wrote:
It seems to be readonly already, so I cannot remove the files.
Sorry. Fixed. Can you try again please?
All done.
Thanks. Back to read only.
Jim
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/11/2013 03:36 PM, Stephan Richter wrote:
Hi Tres (and everyone else reading along),
as you are probably aware, zope.security is a package that blocks a
lot of other packages from being ported. I just checked out the
coverage on Github and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/11/2013 09:16 PM, Stephan Richter wrote:
On Monday, February 11, 2013 06:34:52 PM Tres Seaver wrote:
I propose to split zope.security.untrustedpython into a separate
package called zope.untrustedpython, so that a port of
zope.security to
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Gediminas Paulauskas mene...@pov.lt wrote:
So I removed the (incorrect) issubclass call, and the rest of the test
passes, showing that ABC checker works correctly. Even if it would be
good that issubclass worked, I think that mixing ABCs and Zope
interfaces is
2010/10/27 Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/27/2010 07:58 AM, Zope Tests Summarizer wrote:
...
Subject: FAILED : Zope Buildbot / zopetoolkit-py2.7 slave-ubuntu64
From: jdriessen at thehealthagency.com
Date: Wed Oct 27 04:49:22 EDT 2010
* 2010-01-05 08:26, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:
While doing it, I'm trying to remove dependencies which are zope-specific,
to minimize the overhead for developers who are using the whole zope stack
(like me :)).
Ehm, I meant who are NOT using the whole zope stack.
Fabio
On Thursday 08 October 2009, John Murphy wrote:
We noticed that the KGS 3.4.0b2 uses zope.security 3.4.0 and KGS
3.5dev uses zope.security 3.6.0, both of which are vulnerable to this
bug. It would be great if the fixed version was incorporated into the
KGS soon, as segfaults during garbage
We recently were bit by a segfault bug in zope.security
(https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope3/+bug/181833) when migrating an
application from Python 2.4 to 2.6. The newest zope.security (3.7.1,
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.security/3.7.1#id1) has a fix for the
bug.
We noticed that the KGS
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 5:15 PM, John Murphy jac...@zope.com wrote:
We recently were bit by a segfault bug in zope.security
(https://bugs.launchpad.net/zope3/+bug/181833) when migrating an
application from Python 2.4 to 2.6. The newest zope.security (3.7.1,
I think you will need to update your own application specific version
set. The Zope 3 KGS is currently unmaintained. The future of the Zope
3 project is currently unknown. The last release has been eight months
ago and there is currently no active maintenance going on.
My bad, I should've
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-1-30 18:50 +:
Brian Sutherland wrote:
zope.configuration.x
zope.configuration.y
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
Then setuptools needs fixing.
But not
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-2-6 12:31 +:
...
I would find is very unintuitive when configuration were centralized
(in subpackages of zope.configuration) rather than modular.
Configuration belongs to the application or framework component
that depends on this configuration not to
Chris Withers wrote at 2009-1-30 18:50 +:
Brian Sutherland wrote:
zope.configuration.x
zope.configuration.y
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
Then setuptools needs fixing.
But not for this purpose:
I
On Jan 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Brian Sutherland wrote:
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
zope.configuration isn't a namespace package. It is simply a package
with subpackages.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
Zope
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 06:21:27AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
On Jan 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Brian Sutherland wrote:
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
zope.configuration isn't a namespace package. It is simply a
Fred Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com
wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into zope.componentzcml or
something like that. We could then decide to move the class and
Chris Withers wrote:
Fred Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com
wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into zope.componentzcml or
something like that. We could then decide
Martijn Faassen wrote:
This makes a lot more sense to me than having the ZCML support in
either zope.component or zope.security.
Indeed, surely all zcml stuff belongs in zope.configuration anyway?
No, not there either, as zope.configuration doesn't define *any*
directives except the basic
On Jan 30, 2009, at 6:59 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Fred Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com
wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into zope.componentzcml or
something
On Jan 30, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:
Fred Drake wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com
wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 05:32:33PM +, Chris Withers wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
This makes a lot more sense to me than having the ZCML support in
either zope.component or zope.security.
Indeed, surely all zcml stuff belongs in zope.configuration anyway?
No, not there either, as
Brian Sutherland wrote:
zope.configuration.x
zope.configuration.y
Please don't, having namespace packages that contain files (as
zope.configuration already does) breaks setuptools.
Then setuptools needs fixing.
There's no reason why zope.configuration and zope.configuration.x
shouldn't
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Martijn Faassen
faas...@startifact.com wrote:
No, not there either, as zope.configuration doesn't define *any*
directives except the basic ones like 'include' and 'configure'. If you
would implement zope 3's directives in zope.configuration it'd start
pulling
Benji York wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Martijn Faassen
faas...@startifact.com wrote:
No, not there either, as zope.configuration doesn't define *any*
directives except the basic ones like 'include' and 'configure'. If you
would implement zope 3's directives in
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:
Benji York wrote:
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Martijn Faassen
faas...@startifact.com wrote:
No, not there either, as zope.configuration doesn't define *any*
directives except the basic ones like 'include'
Hey,
Dan Korostelev wrote:
[snip]
What about the other use case of class, i.e. declaring implemented
interfaces, as in
class class=.foreignmodule.SomeClass
implements interface=.interfaces.ISomeInterface /
/class
+1. That's kinda strange to have it in zope.security.
I think, the
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com wrote:
I believe it'd be nicer to extract any ZCML related stuff from
zope.component at some point and put it into zope.componentzcml or
something like that. We could then decide to move the class and
module directives in
Hi there,
In the dependency cleanup effort we've got going on at the Grok
cavesprint here at my house, we have moved code around some more.
zope.security was already defining ZCML directives so we've moved the
class directive from zope.app.component and and the module
directive from
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Hi there,
In the dependency cleanup effort we've got going on at the Grok
cavesprint here at my house, we have moved code around some more.
zope.security was already defining ZCML directives so we've moved the
class
On Wednesday 28 January 2009, Marius Gedminas wrote:
Sounds good!
What about the other use case of class, i.e. declaring implemented
interfaces, as in
class class=.foreignmodule.SomeClass
implements interface=.interfaces.ISomeInterface /
/class
I was waiting for that comment. :-)
On Wednesday 28 January 2009, Dan Korostelev wrote:
I think, the better place to move zcml directives is zope.component,
as it already depends on zope.security for the zcml support and the
class directive also has component-related factory subdirective
which declared in zope.component.
Good
Hello,
while trying to install zope.location (3.4.0) and zope.security (3.5.2)
from source
(in order to create a NetBSD-pkgsrc package) I noticed, that they specify
each other in their install-requires list in setup.py.
Looking at the code, they also import each other:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Joachim König [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is only required at runtime, so this is not a (circular) build or
install dependency,
but as the NetBSD-pkgsrc build infrastructure wants to generate the
.pyc/.pyo files
at installation time, I still have a problem
46 matches
Mail list logo
