On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Rob Miller <robm@...> wrote:

>
> i've done a bit of research... is it possible that you have a dependency
> problem, where you have a newer version of zope.interface installed in your
> environment, which is overriding the zope.interface implementation that
> would be the default in your Plone build?
>

Thanks, Rob, I was thinking in this direction but assumed we had an
older package in the live setup which still fulfilled a dependency of
something.

> the ArchetypeTool has a 'listPortalTypesWithInterfaces' method, which
> accepts a sequence of interfaces and calls
> 'iface.isImplementedByInstancesOf(klass)' on each one, for each type.  the
> 'isImplementedByInstancesOf' method is deprecated; the preferred spelling
> would be 'iface.implementedBy(klass)'.
>
> this deprecated method was removed from zope.interface in r70211:
>
> http://svn.zope.org/Zope3/trunk/src/zope/interface/interface.py?rev=70211&r1=70082&r2=70211
>
> it seems that you've somehow ended up w/ an implementation of zope.interface
> that is newer than r70211.  it seems unlikely to me that Plone is shipping
> with a version of zope.interface that is newer than this... if it is, then
> this should be considered an Archetypes bug, b/c AT clearly shouldn't be
> calling methods that are no longer available.
>

It seems that, today, we've already spent enough time on it to justify
considering it a bug, because that method has been deprecated for
ages, IIRC.  It is probably prime time to change that, though, as far
as I can tell, Plone is not giving us this version of zope.interface,
I may have installed an egg at system level for something that uses
mod_python, which I should probably try and figure a way to use
virtualenv for.

> more likely is that some other package that you have installed declared
> zope.interface as a dependency, and a more recent version of zope.interface
> was installed which is now conflicting w/ the one that your Plone version
> installed.  it's possible that this has happened at the system level.  when
> you created your virtualenv, did you use the --no-site-packages option?
>

Yeah, no, heh.  We probably should consider that option, or at least
be a lot more careful with system-level site packages.

The challenge is, now that we have System Python 2.4 in RHEL5, and it
has RPMs for things like PIL and libxml2, it's convenient to use those
instead of reinstalling them into virtualenv, esp as they are not eggs
and seem actually to menially respect the virtualenv.

Thanks, again..

J

-- 
Justin Alan Ryan
Independent Interaction Architect
http://www.bitmonk.net/
* : +1-415-226-1199 x2600

"All because of a bunch of stuff that happened.."
 -Homer Simpson