[ZODB-Dev] zope.interface, zope.testing

[Dmitry Vasiliev]

Tim Peters wrote:
> [Dmitry Vasiliev]
>>>>What the best way to update ZODB/src/zope packages?
> 
> [Tim Peters]
>>>Benign neglect has worked well so far <wink>.
> 
> [Dmitry Vasiliev]
>>Not so well... :-) Try 'python test.py -B' for example.
> 
> Does using current Zope3 trunk src/zope/{interface,testing} pieces repair
> that?

Yes. I already fix the Tester class on the Zope3 trunk, but moreover the 
Tester class is not used anymore.

>>>Note that the ZODB trunk is for ZODB 3.4 development at this point.
>>>Bugfix releases for 3.3 (3.3.1, 3.3.2, ...) will be developed on the 3.3
>>>branch (repos/main/ZODB/branches/3.3).  Like all the other "module
>>>stitching" under SVN, the copies of src/zope pieces under ZODB trunk and
>>>branch are independent.  This is easy to see today, because the ZODB 3.3
>>>branch doesn't have any src/zope pieces.
> 
>>So should I update ZODB/zope only on the trunk?
> 
> ZODB/src/zope only exists on the ZODB trunk, so that's the only ZODB place
> it could be updated.

Ok

> As above, if your goal is to make "test.py -B" work, make sure (via local
> "svn switch"s first) that such updating actually helps. I doubt that it
> will (for example, ZODB trunk's test.py looks nothing like Zope3 trunk's
> test.py anymore).

But ZODB's test.py still depends on 'zope.testing.functional'... :)

> Note that the ZODB 3.3 branch needs to work with Zope 2 too, and the
> src/zope/ pieces you're talking about were copied out of Zope3.  I don't
> want to introduce Zope3 dependencies in a project targeting Zope2, at least
> not before Zope2 is willing to bite that bullet too.

Is interfaces in ZODB only for documentation purposes for now?

> Note also that, even on the ZODB trunk, Zope3's src/zope/testing was copied
> in only because Zope3's src/zope/interface depends on it (see the checkin
> comment for rev 25940; there was no intent to convert ZODB trunk to use
> Zope3's testing machinery; that's not necessarily a bad thing to do, but it
> was at best an irrelevant consideration at the time).

There also was some changes in 'zope.interface' on the Zope3 trunk.

>>BTW, why just not use 'svn:externals'?
> 
> For what, specifically?  Jim got it into his head <wink> that making endless
> copies of everything all over the place under SVN was "a good idea".  I
> don't know whether it is for him, but I've gotten nothing but pain from it.
> I liked the module sharing we did under CVS much better.  svn:externals
> doesn't appear to be equivalent to that, though, so I have no experience
> with svn:externals, nor with anything else quite like it.

'svn:externals' is like a soft links in Unixes I think, but I have no 
experience with it too.

-- 
Dmitry Vasiliev (dima at hlabs.spb.ru)
     http://hlabs.spb.ru