| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
as an adapter for ``ITraverser`` or ``ITraverserFactory``) will now
receive a *request* as the single argument to its ``__call__``
method. In previous versions it was passed a WSGI ``environ``
object. The request object passed to the factory implements
dictionary-like methods in such a way that existing traverser code
which expects to be passed an environ will continue to work.
- Fix docs.
|
|
|
|
the 99% case, and its behavior can be emulated by returning a root object that implements some interface and registering a traverser for that interface.
|
|
directly. In this case, no adaptation is done before traversal. This feature is added such that a routes factory can implement its own traversal logic without establishing an artificial context only to get a hook into the traversal machinery.
|
|
breaks backwards compatibility, migration is trivial.
|
|
solved the reissue_time authentication policy issue a different way).
|
|
directive. If this value is set, it must be an integer representing
the number of seconds which the auth tkt cookie will survive.
Mainly, its existence allows the auth_tkt cookie to survive across
browser sessions.
- The ``reissue_time`` argument to the ``authtktauthenticationpolicy``
ZCML directive now actually works. When it is set to an integer
value, an authticket set-cookie header is appended to the response
whenever a request requires authentication and 'now' minus the
authticket's timestamp is greater than ``reissue_time`` seconds.
- The router now checks for a ``global_response_headers`` attribute of
the request object before returning a response. If this value
exists, it is presumed to be a sequence of two-tuples, representing
a set of headers to append to the 'normal' response headers. This
feature is internal, rather than exposed internally, because it's
unclear whether it will stay around in the long term. It was added
to support the ``reissue_time`` feature of the authtkt
authentication policy.
- The ``authtkt`` authentication policy ``remember`` method now no
longer honors ``token`` or ``userdata`` keyword arguments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in the "repoze.bfg.testing" API chapter. This allows for
registration of "settings" values obtained via
``repoze.bfg.settings.get_settings()`` for use in unit tests.
|
|
import. Thanks to Daniel Holth for the initial patch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
chapter.
|
|
documentation, content cribbed from the WebOb documentation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:mod:`repoze.bfg.url.model_url` Generates a URL`` to the "Hooks"
narrative chapter of the docs.
|
|
from webob import Response
from repoze.bfg.view import bfg_view
class MyView(object):
def __init__(self, context, request):
self.context = context
self.request = request
@bfg_view(name='hello')
def amethod(self):
return Response('hello from %s!' % self.context)
When the bfg_view decorator is used against a class method, a view
is registered for the *class* (it's a "class view" where the "attr"
happens to be the method they're attached to), so the view class
must have a suitable constructor.
|
|
any number of others. Each invocation of the decorator registers a
single view. For instance, the following combination of decorators
and a function will register two views::
from repoze.bfg.view import bfg_view
@bfg_view(name='edit')
@bfg_view(name='change')
def edit(context, request):
pass
This makes it possible to associate more than one view configuration
for a single callable without requiring ZCML.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
function populates a component registry from a ZCML file for testing
purposes.
|
|
documentation chapter.
|
|
--------
- Add ``setUp`` and ``tearDown`` functions to the
``repoze.bfg.testing`` module. Using ``setUp`` in a test setup and
``tearDown`` in a test teardown is now the recommended way to do
component registry setup and teardown. Previously, it was
recommended that a single function named
``repoze.bfg.testing.cleanUp`` be called in both the test setup and
tear down. ``repoze.bfg.testing.cleanUp`` still exists (and will
exist "forever" due to its widespread use); it is now just an alias
for ``repoze.bfg.testing.setUp`` and is nominally deprecated.
- The BFG component registry is now available in view and event
subscriber code as an attribute of the request
ie. ``request.registry``. This fact is currently undocumented
except for this note, because BFG developers never need to interact
with the registry directly anywhere else.
- The BFG component registry now inherits from ``dict``, meaning that
it can optionally be used as a simple dictionary. *Component*
registrations performed against it via e.g. ``registerUtility``,
``registerAdapter``, and similar API methods are kept in a
completely separate namespace than its dict members, so using the
its component API methods won't effect the keys and values in the
dictionary namespace. Likewise, though the component registry
"happens to be" a dictionary, use of mutating dictionary methods
such as ``__setitem__`` will have no influence on any component
registrations made against it. In other words, the registry object
you obtain via e.g. ``repoze.bfg.threadlocal.get_current_registry``
or ``request.registry`` happens to be both a component registry and
a dictionary, but using its component-registry API won't impact data
added to it via its dictionary API and vice versa. This is a
forward compatibility move based on the goals of "marco".
Documentation
-------------
- Various tutorial test modules updated to use
``repoze.bfg.testing.setUp`` and ``repoze.bfg.testing.tearDown``
methods in order to encourage this as best practice going forward.
Backwards Incompatibilities
---------------------------
- Importing ``getSiteManager`` and ``get_registry`` from
``repoze.bfg.registry`` is no longer supported. These imports were
deprecated in repoze.bfg 1.0. Import of ``getSiteManager`` should
be done as ``from zope.component import getSiteManager``. Import of
``get_registry`` should be done as ``from repoze.bfg.threadlocal
import get_current_registry``. This was done to prevent a circular
import dependency.
- Code bases which alternately invoke both
``zope.testing.cleanup.cleanUp`` and ``repoze.bfg.testing.cleanUp``
(treating them equivalently, using them interchangeably) in the
setUp/tearDown of unit tests will begin to experience test failures
due to lack of test isolation. The "right" mechanism is
``repoze.bfg.testing.cleanUp`` (or the combination of
``repoze.bfg.testing.setUp`` and
``repoze.bfg.testing.tearDown``). but a good number of legacy
codebases will use ``zope.testing.cleanup.cleanUp`` instead. We
support ``zope.testing.cleanup.cleanUp`` but not in combination with
``repoze.bfg.testing.cleanUp`` in the same codebase. You should use
one or the other test cleanup function in a single codebase, but not
both.
Internal
--------
- Created new ``repoze.bfg.configuration`` module which assumes
responsibilities previously held by the ``repoze.bfg.registry`` and
``repoze.bfg.router`` modules (avoid a circular import dependency).
- The result of the ``zope.component.getSiteManager`` function in unit
tests set up with ``repoze.bfg.testing.cleanUp`` or
``repoze.bfg.testing.setUp`` will be an instance of
``repoze.bfg.registry.Registry`` instead of the global
``zope.component.globalregistry.base`` registry. This also means
that the threadlocal ZCA API functions such as ``getAdapter`` and
``getUtility`` as well as internal BFG machinery (such as
``model_url`` and ``route_url``) will consult this registry within
unit tests. This is a forward compatibility move based on the goals
of "marco".
- Removed ``repoze.bfg.testing.addCleanUp`` function and associated
module-scope globals. This was never an API.
|
|
predicates to ZCML view declaration, ZCML route declaration, and
``bfg_view`` decorator. See the ``Views`` narrative documentation
chapter for more information about these predicates.
|
|
Explain where "request" comes from in templates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add tests.
|
|
registering routes to satisfy calls to
e.g. ``repoze.bfg.url.route_url`` in unit tests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
following addtional attributes: ``attr``, ``renderer``, and
``wrapper``. These have the same meaning as they do in the context
of a ZCML ``view`` directive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
