Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Zope: Dev

zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects

  

 
Zope dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


optilude+lists at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 1:02 AM

Post #1 of 16 (2037 views)
Permalink
zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects
Hi,

I *think* this is a bug in zc.relationship, but I'm not quite sure.

I'm using ZODB3 3.8.1 (to get BLOB support) and trying to install
plone.app.relations, which depends on zc.relationship 1.0.2. In
particular, it subclasses zc.relationship.shared.Container, and stores
a zc.relationship.index.Index object in self.relationIndex.

Now, the __init__ of zc.relationship.index.Index, which derives from
Persistent, contains the code below. In self._relTools and and
self._attrs, there are a pile of modules, types and functions being
stored. I think these are causing the ZODB to barf. Interestingly, with
whatever version of ZODB that comes with Zope 2.10 (3.7?), there's no
problem.

Any ideas how to work around this, or even why it's a problem in one
version of the ZODB but not another?

zc.relationship.index.Index's initialiser:

def __init__(self, attrs, defaultTransitiveQueriesFactory=None,
dumpRel=generateToken, loadRel=resolveToken,
relFamily=IFBTree, deactivateSets=False):
self._name_TO_mapping = OOBTree.OOBTree()
# held mappings are objtoken to (relcount, relset)
self._EMPTY_name_TO_relcount_relset = OOBTree.OOBTree()
self._reltoken_name_TO_objtokenset = OOBTree.OOBTree()
self.defaultTransitiveQueriesFactory =
defaultTransitiveQueriesFactory
self._relTools = getModuleTools(relFamily)
self._relTools['load'] = loadRel
self._relTools['dump'] = dumpRel
self._relLength = Length.Length()
self._relTokens = self._relTools['TreeSet']()
self.deactivateSets = deactivateSets
self._attrs = _attrs = {} # this is private, and it's not
expected to
# mutate after this initial setting.
seen = set()
for data in attrs:
# see README.txt for description of attrs.
if zope.interface.interfaces.IElement.providedBy(data):
data = {'element': data}
res = getModuleTools(data.get('btree', IFBTree))
res['element'] = val = data['element']
res['attrname'] = val.__name__
res['name'] = data.get('name', res['attrname'])
if res['name'] in _attrs or val in seen:
raise ValueError('Duplicate in attrs', name, val)
seen.add(val)
_attrs[res['name']] = res
res['dump'] = data.get('dump', generateToken)
res['load'] = data.get('load', resolveToken)
if (res['dump'] is None) ^ (res['load'] is None):
raise ValueError(
"either both of 'dump' and 'load' must be None, or
neither")
# when both load and dump are None, this is a small
# optimization that can be a large optimization if the
returned
# value is one of the main four options of the selected
btree
# family (BTree, TreeSet, Set, Bucket).
res['interface'] = val.interface
res['multiple'] = data.get('multiple', False)
res['call'] = zope.interface.interfaces.IMethod.providedBy(val)
if res['TreeSet'].__name__.startswith('I'):
Mapping = IOBTree.IOBTree
else:
assert res['TreeSet'].__name__.startswith('O')
Mapping = OOBTree.OOBTree
self._name_TO_mapping[res['name']] = Mapping()
# these are objtoken to (relcount, relset)

Regards,
Martin

--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


gary.poster at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 5:06 AM

Post #2 of 16 (1978 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
On Mar 16, 2009, at 4:02 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I *think* this is a bug in zc.relationship, but I'm not quite sure.
>
> I'm using ZODB3 3.8.1 (to get BLOB support) and trying to install
> plone.app.relations, which depends on zc.relationship 1.0.2. In
> particular, it subclasses zc.relationship.shared.Container, and
> stores
> a zc.relationship.index.Index object in self.relationIndex.
>
> Now, the __init__ of zc.relationship.index.Index, which derives from
> Persistent, contains the code below. In self._relTools and and
> self._attrs, there are a pile of modules, types and functions being
> stored. I think these are causing the ZODB to barf. Interestingly,
> with
> whatever version of ZODB that comes with Zope 2.10 (3.7?), there's no
> problem.
>
> Any ideas how to work around this, or even why it's a problem in one
> version of the ZODB but not another?

No idea yet. What's the barf's traceback?

Gary

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


optilude+lists at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 5:39 AM

Post #3 of 16 (1972 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Gary Poster wrote:
> On Mar 16, 2009, at 4:02 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I *think* this is a bug in zc.relationship, but I'm not quite sure.
>>
>> I'm using ZODB3 3.8.1 (to get BLOB support) and trying to install
>> plone.app.relations, which depends on zc.relationship 1.0.2. In
>> particular, it subclasses zc.relationship.shared.Container, and
>> stores
>> a zc.relationship.index.Index object in self.relationIndex.
>>
>> Now, the __init__ of zc.relationship.index.Index, which derives from
>> Persistent, contains the code below. In self._relTools and and
>> self._attrs, there are a pile of modules, types and functions being
>> stored. I think these are causing the ZODB to barf. Interestingly,
>> with
>> whatever version of ZODB that comes with Zope 2.10 (3.7?), there's no
>> problem.
>>
>> Any ideas how to work around this, or even why it's a problem in one
>> version of the ZODB but not another?
>
> No idea yet. What's the barf's traceback?

Mmmm... it seems that zc.relationship 1.1 fixes the issue, but has some
other problems (an undefined variable minValues or similar - I haven't
got a build with this version in it right now); 2.0dev seems better,
albeit a bit scary at pre-alpha. Also, I think 2.0dev *requires* ZODB
3.8, though, which means we have to choose one or the other. Ideally,
I'd like a version of plone.relations that works with both ZODB 2.7 and 2.8.

I'm still having some problems with zc.relationship 2.0dev interacting
with five.intid (which has some special path handling to aq-wrap objects
that are turned from key references), though I'm hoping to work around them.

The traceback was:

File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/zope/Zope-2.10.6-final-py2.4/lib/python/ZServer/PubCore/ZServerPublisher.py",

line 25, in __init__
response=b)
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/zope/Zope-2.10.6-final-py2.4/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py",

line 401, in publish_module
environ, debug, request, response)
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/zope/Zope-2.10.6-final-py2.4/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py",

line 202, in publish_module_standard
response = publish(request, module_name, after_list, debug=debug)
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/Products.PDBDebugMode-0.2-py2.4.egg/Products/PDBDebugMode/__init__.py",

line 47, in pdb_publish
mapply=mapply, )
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/zope/Zope-2.10.6-final-py2.4/lib/python/ZPublisher/Publish.py",

line 125, in publish
transactions_manager.commit()
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/zope/Zope-2.10.6-final-py2.4/lib/python/Zope2/App/startup.py",

line 238, in commit
transaction.commit()
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/transaction/_manager.py",

line 93, in commit
return self.get().commit()
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/transaction/_transaction.py",

line 328, in commit
t, v, tb = self._saveAndGetCommitishError()
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/transaction/_transaction.py",

line 325, in commit
self._commitResources()
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/transaction/_transaction.py",

line 424, in _commitResources
rm.commit(self)
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/ZODB/Connection.py",

line 541, in commit
self._commit(transaction)
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/ZODB/Connection.py",

line 586, in _commit
self._store_objects(ObjectWriter(obj), transaction)
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/ZODB/Connection.py",

line 620, in _store_objects
p = writer.serialize(obj) # This calls __getstate__ of obj
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/ZODB/serialize.py",

line 407, in serialize
return self._dump(meta, obj.__getstate__())
File
"/Users/optilude/.buildout/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.1-py2.4-macosx-10.3-i386.egg/ZODB/serialize.py",

line 416, in _dump
self._p.dump(state)
File
"/opt/local/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.4/lib/python2.4/copy_reg.py",

line 69, in _reduce_ex
raise TypeError, "can't pickle %s objects" % base.__name__
TypeError: can't pickle module objects

Martin

--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


optilude+lists at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 6:09 AM

Post #4 of 16 (1969 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Gary Poster wrote:
>> On Mar 16, 2009, at 4:02 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I *think* this is a bug in zc.relationship, but I'm not quite sure.
>>>
>>> I'm using ZODB3 3.8.1 (to get BLOB support) and trying to install
>>> plone.app.relations, which depends on zc.relationship 1.0.2. In
>>> particular, it subclasses zc.relationship.shared.Container, and
>>> stores
>>> a zc.relationship.index.Index object in self.relationIndex.
>>>
>>> Now, the __init__ of zc.relationship.index.Index, which derives from
>>> Persistent, contains the code below. In self._relTools and and
>>> self._attrs, there are a pile of modules, types and functions being
>>> stored. I think these are causing the ZODB to barf. Interestingly,
>>> with
>>> whatever version of ZODB that comes with Zope 2.10 (3.7?), there's no
>>> problem.
>>>
>>> Any ideas how to work around this, or even why it's a problem in one
>>> version of the ZODB but not another?
>> No idea yet. What's the barf's traceback?
>
> Mmmm... it seems that zc.relationship 1.1 fixes the issue, but has some
> other problems (an undefined variable minValues or similar - I haven't
> got a build with this version in it right now); 2.0dev seems better,
> albeit a bit scary at pre-alpha. Also, I think 2.0dev *requires* ZODB
> 3.8, though, which means we have to choose one or the other. Ideally,
> I'd like a version of plone.relations that works with both ZODB 2.7 and 2.8.

I meant ZODB 3.7 and 3.8, of course. :)

Martin

--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


gary.poster at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 6:13 AM

Post #5 of 16 (1980 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
On Mar 16, 2009, at 8:39 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:

> Gary Poster wrote:
>> On Mar 16, 2009, at 4:02 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I *think* this is a bug in zc.relationship, but I'm not quite sure.
>>>
>>> I'm using ZODB3 3.8.1 (to get BLOB support) and trying to install
>>> plone.app.relations, which depends on zc.relationship 1.0.2. In
>>> particular, it subclasses zc.relationship.shared.Container, and
>>> stores
>>> a zc.relationship.index.Index object in self.relationIndex.
>>>
>>> Now, the __init__ of zc.relationship.index.Index, which derives from
>>> Persistent, contains the code below. In self._relTools and and
>>> self._attrs, there are a pile of modules, types and functions being
>>> stored. I think these are causing the ZODB to barf. Interestingly,
>>> with
>>> whatever version of ZODB that comes with Zope 2.10 (3.7?), there's
>>> no
>>> problem.
>>>
>>> Any ideas how to work around this, or even why it's a problem in one
>>> version of the ZODB but not another?
>>
>> No idea yet. What's the barf's traceback?
>
> Mmmm... it seems that zc.relationship 1.1 fixes the issue, but has
> some
> other problems (an undefined variable minValues or similar - I haven't
> got a build with this version in it right now);

OK.

> 2.0dev seems better,
> albeit a bit scary at pre-alpha.

zc.relationship 2.0 trunk is now essentially a wrapping of zc.relation
code for backwards compatibility.

You guys are the main clients for zc.relationship at this point, I
suspect.

As I see it, your relatively reasonable options are these:

- MOST WORK: Move the plone.relation code to depend on zc.relation.
There is an upgrade path for the old indexes. You would need to copy
over the old zc.relationship relationship containers to the Plone
package. IIRC, Alec's tests of those bits were good, and you could
just keep the bits from zc.relationship you needed. ZODB module path
issues in legacy databases would be among the more annoying bits of
this approach, though we all know the usual solutions there.

- LESS WORK: See how zc.relationship trunk works for you. If it makes
the code happy, I can release it or help you to do so. It's certainly
been sitting around long enough. Then at least you are sitting
(indirectly) on top of zc.relation, the package that (for instance)
Martijn F.'s Grok work exercises. This would be my preferred
compromise between effort and migration. The problem here is that it
probably does depend on ZODB 3.8, and I'd rather not make the
zc.relation code support the older spellings, so that's probably out
for you unless you want to make a concrete counter-proposal in this
regard.

- LEAST WORK: Figure out what's wrong with zc.relationship 1.1. What
you described sounds trivial to fix, and I don't have any ethical
issues over only supporting the most recent release of the 1.x line,
so I don't want to think about the earlier releases. I suspect this
is what you want. We can make a 1.1.1 release and you can move on.

Gary
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


optilude+lists at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 6:19 AM

Post #6 of 16 (1982 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Hi Gary,

> zc.relationship 2.0 trunk is now essentially a wrapping of zc.relation
> code for backwards compatibility.

I see. But 2.0dev on pypi isn't?

What's the story behind zc.relation and the evolution of zc.relationship?

> You guys are the main clients for zc.relationship at this point, I
> suspect.

Possibly, yes. ;-)

> As I see it, your relatively reasonable options are these:
>
> - MOST WORK: Move the plone.relation code to depend on zc.relation.
> There is an upgrade path for the old indexes. You would need to copy
> over the old zc.relationship relationship containers to the Plone
> package. IIRC, Alec's tests of those bits were good, and you could
> just keep the bits from zc.relationship you needed. ZODB module path
> issues in legacy databases would be among the more annoying bits of
> this approach, though we all know the usual solutions there.

I think we'd need Alec to find the time to do this if it's to happen,
but it does sound like the better option.

> - LESS WORK: See how zc.relationship trunk works for you. If it makes
> the code happy, I can release it or help you to do so. It's certainly
> been sitting around long enough. Then at least you are sitting
> (indirectly) on top of zc.relation, the package that (for instance)
> Martijn F.'s Grok work exercises. This would be my preferred
> compromise between effort and migration. The problem here is that it
> probably does depend on ZODB 3.8, and I'd rather not make the
> zc.relation code support the older spellings, so that's probably out
> for you unless you want to make a concrete counter-proposal in this
> regard.

Well, having a version that only works with ZODB 3.8 isn't *terrible*,
it's just annoying. If and when Plone actually ships with five.intid and
plone.relations, it'll be on ZODB 3.8 anyway. It's just a bit more work
for people wanting to use it.

> - LEAST WORK: Figure out what's wrong with zc.relationship 1.1. What
> you described sounds trivial to fix, and I don't have any ethical
> issues over only supporting the most recent release of the 1.x line,
> so I don't want to think about the earlier releases. I suspect this
> is what you want. We can make a 1.1.1 release and you can move on.

Hopefully. Do we know that zc.relationship 1.1 works with both ZODB
versions?

What's the difference between 1.1.1 and 2.0dev on pypi?

Martin

--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


gary.poster at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 6:34 AM

Post #7 of 16 (1980 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
On Mar 16, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:

> Hi Gary,
>
>> zc.relationship 2.0 trunk is now essentially a wrapping of
>> zc.relation
>> code for backwards compatibility.
>
> I see. But 2.0dev on pypi isn't?
>
> What's the story behind zc.relation and the evolution of
> zc.relationship?

Briefly, I wanted a package that only included the bit I used, the
index (in zc.relation, the catalog). I abstracted it, made sure that
zc.relation had 100% test coverage, and changed the names and the API
in a backwards incompatible way. I also added a bunch of new
features, like a transitive index for hierarchies.

See http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zc.relation#changes for details.

zc.relationship trunk then depended on zc.relation, and existed to
provide backwards compatibility while not forcing me to maintain two
versions of the same codebase. The upgrade path that the zc.relation
PyPI doc describes from a zc.relationship index to a zc.relation index
has been used in production, IIRC, but it requires zc.relationship
trunk.

I would be quite happy to release zc.relationship trunk as 2.0, if it
helped you: it was used in production. If the ZODB 3.8-only issue is
not a show-stopper then that's a good approach, and hopefully pretty
easy for everyone.

>> You guys are the main clients for zc.relationship at this point, I
>> suspect.
>
> Possibly, yes. ;-)
>
>> As I see it, your relatively reasonable options are these:
>>
>> - MOST WORK: Move the plone.relation code to depend on zc.relation.
>> There is an upgrade path for the old indexes. You would need to copy
>> over the old zc.relationship relationship containers to the Plone
>> package. IIRC, Alec's tests of those bits were good, and you could
>> just keep the bits from zc.relationship you needed. ZODB module path
>> issues in legacy databases would be among the more annoying bits of
>> this approach, though we all know the usual solutions there.
>
> I think we'd need Alec to find the time to do this if it's to happen,
> but it does sound like the better option.

Perfect world, sure.

>> - LESS WORK: See how zc.relationship trunk works for you. If it
>> makes
>> the code happy, I can release it or help you to do so. It's
>> certainly
>> been sitting around long enough. Then at least you are sitting
>> (indirectly) on top of zc.relation, the package that (for instance)
>> Martijn F.'s Grok work exercises. This would be my preferred
>> compromise between effort and migration. The problem here is that it
>> probably does depend on ZODB 3.8, and I'd rather not make the
>> zc.relation code support the older spellings, so that's probably out
>> for you unless you want to make a concrete counter-proposal in this
>> regard.
>
> Well, having a version that only works with ZODB 3.8 isn't *terrible*,
> it's just annoying. If and when Plone actually ships with five.intid
> and
> plone.relations, it'll be on ZODB 3.8 anyway. It's just a bit more
> work
> for people wanting to use it.

Gotcha. Your choice. FWIW, this was the path I intended/hoped you
guys would follow when I did the work to make zc.relationship sit on
top of zc.relation.

>> - LEAST WORK: Figure out what's wrong with zc.relationship 1.1. What
>> you described sounds trivial to fix, and I don't have any ethical
>> issues over only supporting the most recent release of the 1.x line,
>> so I don't want to think about the earlier releases. I suspect this
>> is what you want. We can make a 1.1.1 release and you can move on.
>
> Hopefully. Do we know that zc.relationship 1.1 works with both ZODB
> versions?

That would be a significant point of its existence, so I certainly
hope so. I'm 80%+ confident that it does, and would regard not
supporting 3.7 as a bug that I'd be willing to fix.

> What's the difference between 1.1.1 and 2.0dev on pypi?

I intended that 1.1.1 would simply make the absolutely minimal changes
necessary for you to be able to use the 1.1 branch. It would not have
any of the 2.x changes at all.

Gary
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


optilude+lists at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 7:21 AM

Post #8 of 16 (1976 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Hi Gary,

Thanks for being so helpful!

>> What's the difference between 1.1.1 and 2.0dev on pypi?
>
> I intended that 1.1.1 would simply make the absolutely minimal changes
> necessary for you to be able to use the 1.1 branch. It would not have
> any of the 2.x changes at all.

But we're saying that 2.0dev is a very different beast to the trunk that
could eventually become 2.0, right? 2.0dev doesn't have a zc.relation
dependency, for example.

I'm not sure what else there may be in 2.0dev that's useful, of course.

I think we need to hear from Alec on what makes most sense for
plone.relations. I care pretty much only about the plone.relations API,
so I'm sure either of your three options could work. However, I have no
idea how hard it'd be in practice to move closer to zc.relation.

Martin

--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


gary.poster at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 7:31 AM

Post #9 of 16 (1978 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
On Mar 16, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote:

> Hi Gary,
>
> Thanks for being so helpful!

Happy to.

>>> What's the difference between 1.1.1 and 2.0dev on pypi?
>>
>> I intended that 1.1.1 would simply make the absolutely minimal
>> changes
>> necessary for you to be able to use the 1.1 branch. It would not
>> have
>> any of the 2.x changes at all.
>
> But we're saying that 2.0dev is a very different beast to the trunk
> that
> could eventually become 2.0, right? 2.0dev doesn't have a zc.relation
> dependency, for example.

Yes. They are related, of course, but practically significantly
different.

> I'm not sure what else there may be in 2.0dev that's useful, of
> course.

Honestly, I'm not sure about the alpha any more either, though IIRC I
did do a reasonable job on the change logs, so we could figure it out.

> I think we need to hear from Alec on what makes most sense for
> plone.relations. I care pretty much only about the plone.relations
> API,
> so I'm sure either of your three options could work. However, I have
> no
> idea how hard it'd be in practice to move closer to zc.relation.

Sure.

My hope is that switching to zc.relationship trunk (2.0) would be a
drop-in change. Otherwise, 1.1(.1) definitely should be (with
whatever necessary bug fixes).

Let me know how I can help, once you all decide what direction you
want to go.

Gary

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


optilude+lists at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 10:04 AM

Post #10 of 16 (1975 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Gary Poster wrote:

>> Hopefully. Do we know that zc.relationship 1.1 works with both ZODB
>> versions?
>
> That would be a significant point of its existence, so I certainly
> hope so. I'm 80%+ confident that it does, and would regard not
> supporting 3.7 as a bug that I'd be willing to fix.

Right... so I've just fixed the errors Pyflakes found with
zc.relationship 1.1 branch. This now works reliably for my ZODB 3.8.1 build.

However, it won't install in my ZODB 3.7 environment, because of this
line in setup.py:

'ZODB3 >= 3.8dev',

Was that an intentional minimum?

Martin

--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


optilude+lists at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 10:20 AM

Post #11 of 16 (1965 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Gary Poster wrote:
>
>>> Hopefully. Do we know that zc.relationship 1.1 works with both ZODB
>>> versions?
>> That would be a significant point of its existence, so I certainly
>> hope so. I'm 80%+ confident that it does, and would regard not
>> supporting 3.7 as a bug that I'd be willing to fix.
>
> Right... so I've just fixed the errors Pyflakes found with
> zc.relationship 1.1 branch. This now works reliably for my ZODB 3.8.1 build.
>
> However, it won't install in my ZODB 3.7 environment, because of this
> line in setup.py:
>
> 'ZODB3 >= 3.8dev',
>
> Was that an intentional minimum?

Okay... so, if we remove that restriction, and add the following monkey
patch to (which is already in plone.relations) to __init__.py, then this
works on ZODB 3.7 with Zope 2.10, and the tests pass (save for cosmetic
doctest failures on 3.7 which are easy to fix):

# A tiny monkey patch due to some re-organization of future BTree modules
try:
from BTrees.OOBTree import BTree
except ImportError:
import BTrees.OOBTree
import BTrees.IOBTree
import BTrees.OIBTree
import BTrees.IIBTree
import BTrees.IFBTree
BTrees.OOBTree.BTree = BTrees.OOBTree.OOBTree
BTrees.OOBTree.Set = BTrees.OOBTree.OOSet
BTrees.OOBTree.Bucket = BTrees.OOBTree.OOBucket
BTrees.OOBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.OOBTree.OOTreeSet
BTrees.IOBTree.BTree = BTrees.IOBTree.IOBTree
BTrees.IOBTree.Set = BTrees.IOBTree.IOSet
BTrees.IOBTree.Bucket = BTrees.IOBTree.IOBucket
BTrees.IOBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.IOBTree.IOTreeSet
BTrees.OIBTree.BTree = BTrees.OIBTree.OIBTree
BTrees.OIBTree.Set = BTrees.OIBTree.OISet
BTrees.OIBTree.Bucket = BTrees.OIBTree.OIBucket
BTrees.OIBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.OIBTree.OITreeSet
BTrees.IIBTree.BTree = BTrees.IIBTree.IIBTree
BTrees.IIBTree.Set = BTrees.IIBTree.IISet
BTrees.IIBTree.Bucket = BTrees.IIBTree.IIBucket
BTrees.IIBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.IIBTree.IITreeSet
BTrees.IFBTree.BTree = BTrees.IFBTree.IFBTree
BTrees.IFBTree.Set = BTrees.IFBTree.IFSet
BTrees.IFBTree.Bucket = BTrees.IFBTree.IFBucket
BTrees.IFBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.IFBTree.IFTreeSet


Shall I just check that in + the removal of the minimum version pin?

If we do that, then we can let plone.relations depend on zc.relationship
1.1.1 explicitly and have support for both ZODB versions, which would be
nice.

Martin

--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


gary.poster at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 10:23 AM

Post #12 of 16 (1975 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
On Mar 16, 2009, at 1:20 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:

> Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> Gary Poster wrote:
>>
>>>> Hopefully. Do we know that zc.relationship 1.1 works with both ZODB
>>>> versions?
>>> That would be a significant point of its existence, so I certainly
>>> hope so. I'm 80%+ confident that it does, and would regard not
>>> supporting 3.7 as a bug that I'd be willing to fix.
>>
>> Right... so I've just fixed the errors Pyflakes found with
>> zc.relationship 1.1 branch. This now works reliably for my ZODB
>> 3.8.1 build.
>>
>> However, it won't install in my ZODB 3.7 environment, because of this
>> line in setup.py:
>>
>> 'ZODB3 >= 3.8dev',
>>
>> Was that an intentional minimum?
>
> Okay... so, if we remove that restriction, and add the following
> monkey
> patch to (which is already in plone.relations) to __init__.py, then
> this
> works on ZODB 3.7 with Zope 2.10, and the tests pass (save for
> cosmetic
> doctest failures on 3.7 which are easy to fix):
>
> # A tiny monkey patch due to some re-organization of future BTree
> modules
> try:
> from BTrees.OOBTree import BTree
> except ImportError:
> import BTrees.OOBTree
> import BTrees.IOBTree
> import BTrees.OIBTree
> import BTrees.IIBTree
> import BTrees.IFBTree
> BTrees.OOBTree.BTree = BTrees.OOBTree.OOBTree
> BTrees.OOBTree.Set = BTrees.OOBTree.OOSet
> BTrees.OOBTree.Bucket = BTrees.OOBTree.OOBucket
> BTrees.OOBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.OOBTree.OOTreeSet
> BTrees.IOBTree.BTree = BTrees.IOBTree.IOBTree
> BTrees.IOBTree.Set = BTrees.IOBTree.IOSet
> BTrees.IOBTree.Bucket = BTrees.IOBTree.IOBucket
> BTrees.IOBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.IOBTree.IOTreeSet
> BTrees.OIBTree.BTree = BTrees.OIBTree.OIBTree
> BTrees.OIBTree.Set = BTrees.OIBTree.OISet
> BTrees.OIBTree.Bucket = BTrees.OIBTree.OIBucket
> BTrees.OIBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.OIBTree.OITreeSet
> BTrees.IIBTree.BTree = BTrees.IIBTree.IIBTree
> BTrees.IIBTree.Set = BTrees.IIBTree.IISet
> BTrees.IIBTree.Bucket = BTrees.IIBTree.IIBucket
> BTrees.IIBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.IIBTree.IITreeSet
> BTrees.IFBTree.BTree = BTrees.IFBTree.IFBTree
> BTrees.IFBTree.Set = BTrees.IFBTree.IFSet
> BTrees.IFBTree.Bucket = BTrees.IFBTree.IFBucket
> BTrees.IFBTree.TreeSet = BTrees.IFBTree.IFTreeSet
>
>
> Shall I just check that in + the removal of the minimum version pin?

Yes, +1. Thank you. I was about to write to your other message that
this was quite possibly the only 3.8 dependency.

> If we do that, then we can let plone.relations depend on
> zc.relationship
> 1.1.1 explicitly and have support for both ZODB versions, which
> would be
> nice.

Sounds great. Would you like access to the PyPI zc.relationship
record so you can upload the new version? If so, are you "optilude"
there?

Gary

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


optilude+lists at gmail

Mar 16, 2009, 7:55 PM

Post #13 of 16 (1962 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Gary Poster wrote:

> Yes, +1. Thank you. I was about to write to your other message that
> this was quite possibly the only 3.8 dependency.

Cool. Committed.

>> If we do that, then we can let plone.relations depend on
>> zc.relationship
>> 1.1.1 explicitly and have support for both ZODB versions, which
>> would be
>> nice.
>
> Sounds great. Would you like access to the PyPI zc.relationship
> record so you can upload the new version? If so, are you "optilude"
> there?

That'd be great, yeah. Or else, if you want to tag a release from the
1.1 branch, that should be safe (and even less work for me :-)

Cheers,
Martin

--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


gary.poster at gmail

Mar 17, 2009, 8:00 AM

Post #14 of 16 (1932 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
On Mar 16, 2009, at 10:55 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:

> Gary Poster wrote:
>
>> Yes, +1. Thank you. I was about to write to your other message that
>> this was quite possibly the only 3.8 dependency.
>
> Cool. Committed.
>
>>> If we do that, then we can let plone.relations depend on
>>> zc.relationship
>>> 1.1.1 explicitly and have support for both ZODB versions, which
>>> would be
>>> nice.
>>
>> Sounds great. Would you like access to the PyPI zc.relationship
>> record so you can upload the new version? If so, are you "optilude"
>> there?
>
> That'd be great, yeah. Or else, if you want to tag a release from the
> 1.1 branch, that should be safe (and even less work for me :-)

OK. I changed setup to fix the tests with the most recent packages,
made a tag and release, and gave you access to the PyPI package just
in case.

Gary

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
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 )


do3ccqrv at googlemail

Nov 9, 2009, 2:55 AM

Post #15 of 16 (1103 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Hi,

while this "can't pickle" issue is fixed in zc.relationship, the
latest packaged egg
of plone.relations still depends on zc.relationship<1.1. Thus this
issue persists if one uses the latest plone.relations egg.
This has been fixed on in svn, could somebody with permissions create a new egg?

Best regards,

Patrick



On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 16:00, Gary Poster <gary.poster [at] gmail> wrote:
>
> On Mar 16, 2009, at 10:55 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>
>> Gary Poster wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, +1.  Thank you.  I was about to write to your other message that
>>> this was quite possibly the only 3.8 dependency.
>>
>> Cool. Committed.
>>
>>>> If we do that, then we can let plone.relations depend on
>>>> zc.relationship
>>>> 1.1.1 explicitly and have support for both ZODB versions, which
>>>> would be
>>>> nice.
>>>
>>> Sounds great.  Would you like access to the PyPI zc.relationship
>>> record so you can upload the new version? If so, are you "optilude"
>>> there?
>>
>> That'd be great, yeah. Or else, if you want to tag a release from the
>> 1.1 branch, that should be safe (and even less work for me :-)
>
> OK.  I changed setup to fix the tests with the most recent packages,
> made a tag and release, and gave you access to the PyPI package just
> in case.
>
> Gary
>
> _______________________________________________
> Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev [at] zope
> 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 )
>
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


gary.poster at gmail

Nov 9, 2009, 8:04 AM

Post #16 of 16 (1096 views)
Permalink
Re: zc.relationship - can't pickle module objects [In reply to]
Hi Patrick. I do not have privileges for this egg, and am not
responsible for it. I'm hopeful someone can help you with it, though.

Gary


On Nov 9, 2009, at 5:55 AM, Patrick Gerken wrote:

> Hi,
>
> while this "can't pickle" issue is fixed in zc.relationship, the
> latest packaged egg
> of plone.relations still depends on zc.relationship<1.1. Thus this
> issue persists if one uses the latest plone.relations egg.
> This has been fixed on in svn, could somebody with permissions
> create a new egg?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 16:00, Gary Poster <gary.poster [at] gmail>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 16, 2009, at 10:55 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>
>>> Gary Poster wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, +1. Thank you. I was about to write to your other message
>>>> that
>>>> this was quite possibly the only 3.8 dependency.
>>>
>>> Cool. Committed.
>>>
>>>>> If we do that, then we can let plone.relations depend on
>>>>> zc.relationship
>>>>> 1.1.1 explicitly and have support for both ZODB versions, which
>>>>> would be
>>>>> nice.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds great. Would you like access to the PyPI zc.relationship
>>>> record so you can upload the new version? If so, are you "optilude"
>>>> there?
>>>
>>> That'd be great, yeah. Or else, if you want to tag a release from
>>> the
>>> 1.1 branch, that should be safe (and even less work for me :-)
>>
>> OK. I changed setup to fix the tests with the most recent packages,
>> made a tag and release, and gave you access to the PyPI package just
>> in case.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
>> 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 )
>>

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Zope dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.