|
Home > Archive > Apache Mod-Python > April 2005 > release?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
|
What do you folks think about gearing up for a release? Meaning not adding
new features and focusing on the little details (like docs, tests, bugs).
The only major thing that I think needs to be finalized is FileSession -
I'd like it to see all the locking issues resolved and either the code
rolled in to Session.py or Session.py split into separate files by class,
for consistency. I also think that if FileSession works well, it should be
made the default session mechanism.
Anything else major that I'm missing? I'd like to start a little
discussion on what would be a reasonable timeline and start making baby
steps towards achieving it.
Cheers
Grisha
| |
| dharana 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
| I know I have little voice here but it would be nice to see a release in
the near future particularly because of FileSession and the psp string=
bugfix. If you need help testing the FileSession when the lock stuff is
finished or just general testing I will gladly help. I've been using a
FileSession without locking since I sent to the list without a problem.
However it was just me and the server, nobody else.
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
> What do you folks think about gearing up for a release? Meaning not
> adding new features and focusing on the little details (like docs,
> tests, bugs).
>
> The only major thing that I think needs to be finalized is FileSession -
> I'd like it to see all the locking issues resolved and either the code
> rolled in to Session.py or Session.py split into separate files by
> class, for consistency. I also think that if FileSession works well, it
> should be made the default session mechanism.
>
> Anything else major that I'm missing? I'd like to start a little
> discussion on what would be a reasonable timeline and start making baby
> steps towards achieving it.
>
> Cheers
>
> Grisha
>
>
>
| |
| Jim Gallacher 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
> What do you folks think about gearing up for a release? Meaning not
> adding new features and focusing on the little details (like docs,
> tests, bugs).
+1
> The only major thing that I think needs to be finalized is FileSession -
> I'd like it to see all the locking issues resolved and either the code
> rolled in to Session.py or Session.py split into separate files by
> class, for consistency. I also think that if FileSession works well, it
> should be made the default session mechanism.
I think the last patch I submitted (2005-04-21) takes care of the
locking issues, but I don't think it's been committed yet. There is
still one small change I'd like to make in the do_load method, but other
than that I think the code is in good shape.
I like the idea of separate files for each class since it would make it
easy to add additional backends if there is such a desire in the future.
> Anything else major that I'm missing? I'd like to start a little
> discussion on what would be a reasonable timeline and start making baby
> steps towards achieving it.
>
I'll be away until Sunday, but should be able to put together some
documentation for FileSession and do some additional testing early next
week.
Regards,
Jim
| |
| Daniel Popowich 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
|
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy writes:
>
> What do you folks think about gearing up for a release? Meaning not adding
> new features and focusing on the little details (like docs, tests, bugs).
Great idea!
Also...I have on a number of occasions attempted to donate mpservlets
to the mainstream modpython distribution. Assuming I merge my
documentation into the standard format, what do you think about
including this handler in this release?
Daniel Popowich
-----------------------------------------------
http://home.comcast.net/~d.popowich/mpservlets/
| |
| Nicolas Lehuen 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
| On 4/27/05, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy <grisha@ispol.com> wrote:
>=20
> What do you folks think about gearing up for a release? Meaning not addin=
g
> new features and focusing on the little details (like docs, tests, bugs).
>=20
> The only major thing that I think needs to be finalized is FileSession -
> I'd like it to see all the locking issues resolved and either the code
> rolled in to Session.py or Session.py split into separate files by class,
> for consistency. I also think that if FileSession works well, it should b=
e
> made the default session mechanism.
>=20
> Anything else major that I'm missing? I'd like to start a little
> discussion on what would be a reasonable timeline and start making baby
> steps towards achieving it.
>=20
> Cheers
>=20
> Grisha
>=20
Woops, just when I've checked in a big set of changes ;-). I've just
fixed MODPYTHON-9, which was to me the most annoying bug that was left
in mod_python.publisher. While I was at it, I've fixed MODPYTHON-8, so
the locking mechanism of the publisher is much more lightweight.
I've done non-regression tests using the unit test suite (to which
I've added a few more tests to check for some special behaviour of the
publisher). Everything seems OK, but one or two +1s from people using
the publisher would be great.
I'm going to check in the last fixes to FileSession, if everybody
agrees with Jim's design. I think the fact that the grace period does
not protect against long running requests (requests running for more
than the grace period which is typically 120 seconds) should be a
documented feature, not a bug  . People running long request should
either not run them with a session context, or know what they are
doing.
Apart from that, yes, a 3.2.0 release would be great, there is quite a
lot of bug fixes that are awaiting to come to the real world now .
Regards,
Nicolas
| |
| azurIt 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
|
...and pls don't forget to fix bugs in publisher.py in 2.7.x version. i
sent bugreport to both lists and also directly to you Grisha and it's
still not fixed in CVS..
azurIt
>=20
> What do you folks think about gearing up for a release? Meaning not
adding=20
> new features and focusing on the little details (like docs, tests,
bugs).
>=20
> The only major thing that I think needs to be finalized is
FileSession -=20
> I'd like it to see all the locking issues resolved and either the code=20
> rolled in to Session.py or Session.py split into separate files by
class,=20
> for consistency. I also think that if FileSession works well, it
should be=20
> made the default session mechanism.
>=20
> Anything else major that I'm missing? I'd like to start a little=20
> discussion on what would be a reasonable timeline and start making baby=
=20
> steps towards achieving it.
>=20
> Cheers
>=20
> Grisha
>=20
=0A_____________________________________
__________________________________=
=0A=C8asopisy prin=E1=B9aj=FAce aktu=E1lne inform=E1cie z oblasti dan=ED, =
=FA=E8tovn=EDctva,=0Amiezd, personalistiky, odme=F2ovania vo forme odborn=
=FDch =E8l=E1nkov, koment=E1rov=0Aa praktick=FDch pr=EDkladov.=0AN=E1jdete =
na str=E1nke http://www.epi.sk/pp.htm=0A
| |
| Nicolas Lehuen 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
| SSdtIHNvcnJ5IGJ1dCBJJ20gZ29pbmcgdG8gcGFz
cyBvbiB0aGlzIG9uZSwgYXMgSSBkb24ndCBo
YXZlIHRoZQpyZXF1aXJlZCBlbnZpcm9ubWVudC4g
V2hvIGlzIHJlYWR5IHRvIG1lcmdlIHRoZSBi
dWdmaXhlcyBiYWNrIGluIHRoZQoyLjcueCB2ZXJz
aW9uID8KCldoYXQgaWYgd2UgdXNlZCB0aGUg
My4yIHZlcnNpb24gYW5kIG1hZGUgc3VyZSB0aGF0
IGl0IHJ1biBvbiBBcGFjaGUKMS4zID8gR3Jp
c2hhLCBkbyB5b3UgdGhpbmsgaXQgd291bGQgYmUg
cG9zc2libGUgPyBJIGRvbid0IGtub3cgQXBh
Y2hlCjEuMyBhbmQgbW9kX3B5dGhvbiAyLjcgZW5v
dWdoIHRvIHNlZSBpZiBpdCdzIGZlYXNhYmxl
LgoKUmVnYXJkcywKCk5pY29sYXMKCk9uIDQvMjcv
MDUsIGF6dXJJdCA8YXp1cml0QHBvYm94LnNr
PiB3cm90ZToKPiAKPiAuLmFuZCBwbHMgZG9uJ3Qg
Zm9yZ2V0IHRvIGZpeCBidWdzIGluIHB1Ymxp
c2hlci5weSBpbiAyLjcueCB2ZXJzaW9uLiBpCj4g
c2VudCBidWdyZXBvcnQgdG8gYm90aCBsaXN0
cyBhbmQgYWxzbyBkaXJlY3RseSB0byB5b3UgR3Jp
c2hhIGFuZCBpdCdzCj4gc3RpbGwgbm90IGZp
eGVkIGluIENWUy4uCj4gCj4gYXp1ckl0Cj4gCj4g
Cj4gPgo+ID4gV2hhdCBkbyB5b3UgZm9sa3Mg
dGhpbmsgYWJvdXQgZ2VhcmluZyB1cCBmb3IgYSBy
ZWxlYXNlPyBNZWFuaW5nIG5vdAo+IGFkZGlu
Zwo+ID4gbmV3IGZlYXR1cmVzIGFuZCBmb2N1c2lu
ZyBvbiB0aGUgbGl0dGxlIGRldGFpbHMgKGxp
a2UgZG9jcywgdGVzdHMsCj4gYnVncykuCj4gPgo+
ID4gVGhlIG9ubHkgbWFqb3IgdGhpbmcgdGhh
dCBJIHRoaW5rIG5lZWRzIHRvIGJlIGZpbmFsaXpl
ZCBpcwo+IEZpbGVTZXNzaW9uIC0KPiA+IEkn
ZCBsaWtlIGl0IHRvIHNlZSBhbGwgdGhlIGxvY2tp
bmcgaXNzdWVzIHJlc29sdmVkIGFuZCBlaXRo
ZXIgdGhlIGNvZGUKPiA+IHJvbGxlZCBpbiB0byBT
ZXNzaW9uLnB5IG9yIFNlc3Npb24ucHkgc3Bs
aXQgaW50byBzZXBhcmF0ZSBmaWxlcyBieQo+IGNs
YXNzLAo+ID4gZm9yIGNvbnNpc3RlbmN5LiBJ
IGFsc28gdGhpbmsgdGhhdCBpZiBGaWxlU2Vzc2lv
biB3b3JrcyB3ZWxsLCBpdAo+IHNob3VsZCBi
ZQo+ID4gbWFkZSB0aGUgZGVmYXVsdCBzZXNzaW9u
IG1lY2hhbmlzbS4KPiA+Cj4gPiBBbnl0aGlu
ZyBlbHNlIG1ham9yIHRoYXQgSSdtIG1pc3Npbmc/IEknZCBsaWtlIHRvIHN0YXJ0IGEgbGl0dGxl
Cj4gPiBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIG9uIHdoYXQgd291bGQg
YmUgYSByZWFzb25hYmxlIHRpbWVsaW5lIGFu
ZCBzdGFydCBtYWtpbmcgYmFieQo+ID4gc3RlcHMg
dG93YXJkcyBhY2hpZXZpbmcgaXQuCj4gPgo+
ID4gQ2hlZXJzCj4gPgo+ID4gR3Jpc2hhCj4gPgo+
IAo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f
X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f
X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCj4gyGFzb3Bp
c3kgcHJpbuG5YWr6Y2UgYWt0deFsbmUgaW5mb3Jt
4WNpZSB6IG9ibGFzdGkgZGFu7Swg+uh0b3Zu
7WN0dmEsCj4gbWllemQsIHBlcnNvbmFsaXN0aWt5
LCBvZG1l8m92YW5pYSB2byBmb3JtZSBvZGJv
cm79Y2gg6Gzhbmtvdiwga29tZW504XJvdgo+IGEg
cHJha3RpY2v9Y2ggcHLta2xhZG92Lgo+IE7h
amRldGUgbmEgc3Ry4W5rZSBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmVw
aS5zay9wcC5odG0KPiAKPgo=
| |
| Nicolas Lehuen 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
| Jim,
Are you OK with this version of FileSession.py ? I'm not sure I
totally followed your thoughts since at a point the thread on
FileSession became a bit blurry to me. If it's not OK, please send me
a corrected version.
Regards,
Nicolas
On 4/27/05, Jim Gallacher <jg.lists@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
> I think the last patch I submitted (2005-04-21) takes care of the
> locking issues, but I don't think it's been committed yet. There is
> still one small change I'd like to make in the do_load method, but other
> than that I think the code is in good shape.
>
> I like the idea of separate files for each class since it would make it
> easy to add additional backends if there is such a desire in the future.
>
>
> I'll be away until Sunday, but should be able to put together some
> documentation for FileSession and do some additional testing early next
> week.
>
> Regards,
> Jim
>
| |
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
|
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Daniel Popowich wrote:
>
> Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy writes:
>
> Great idea!
>
> Also...I have on a number of occasions attempted to donate mpservlets
> to the mainstream modpython distribution. Assuming I merge my
> documentation into the standard format, what do you think about
> including this handler in this release?
I personally am guilty of not having taken the tame to look at mpservlets,
so it's a +0 from me - but what do others on the list think? This might be
the thing to do after this release.
Grisha
| |
| Graham Dumpleton 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
|
On 28/04/2005, at 1:18 AM, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
> What do you folks think about gearing up for a release? Meaning not
> adding new features and focusing on the little details (like docs,
> tests, bugs).
My only comment is that you need to make clear what the minimum version
of
Python that is required is. I have seen some changes that seem to rule
out
use of Python 2.2 any more. Thus, if Python 2.3 is the minimum then
state
it clearly and make sure it is tested for that version. If anything has
been added that makes Python 2.4 mandatory, you are going to annoy a lot
of people, less so if Python 2.3 is the minimum. We still run Python
2.2 on
production servers where I work, but the one machine that runs
mod_python
is still Apache 1.3 and mod_python 2.7 so it isn't an issue, but doesn't
mean others will not grumble.
Graham
| |
| Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy 2005-04-27, 5:45 pm |
|
I'm thinking we're OK to require at least 2.3. If you are one of the users
who still runs 2.2, then latest mod_python is probably not for you either.
Grisha
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
>
> On 28/04/2005, at 1:18 AM, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
>
> My only comment is that you need to make clear what the minimum version of
> Python that is required is. I have seen some changes that seem to rule out
> use of Python 2.2 any more. Thus, if Python 2.3 is the minimum then state
> it clearly and make sure it is tested for that version. If anything has
> been added that makes Python 2.4 mandatory, you are going to annoy a lot
> of people, less so if Python 2.3 is the minimum. We still run Python 2.2 on
> production servers where I work, but the one machine that runs mod_python
> is still Apache 1.3 and mod_python 2.7 so it isn't an issue, but doesn't
> mean others will not grumble.
>
> Graham
>
|
|
|
|
|