[Grok-dev] using zope.testbrowser to test for Unauthorized exceptions and updated zope.publisher with IReRaise exception support

Martijn Faassen faassen at startifact.com
Mon Sep 21 12:41:31 EDT 2009


JW, could you add a note to the upgrade notes about this?

Uli Fouquet wrote:
> In general I'd agree, especially about the
> 'set-handled-exceptions-in-the-ini-file' point. It would really be nice
> to be able to set these stuff in an .ini file. But three things come to
> my mind:
> * what you call "normally" here, is only the behaviour of the publisher 
>   for the last years. Changing behaviour only to protect people from 
>   setting up their tests differently is not a really strong argument to 
>   me, although I can really understand the trouble.

Well, the tests depended on such a behavior of the publisher too. :)

> * I am undecided about having two different behaviours for grok when 
>   used in a WSGI-based debugger pipeline or not. Could that confuse 
>   developers in any way?

I share your concern here. I think ideally in the future the browser 
tests should be run against the WSGI app.

> * There are ongoing thoughts about changing the general way of marking 
>   the exceptions you want to "keep inside". See
>     https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-dev/2009-September/037831.html
>   I'd support the suggestions made there but this would mean that we 
>   had to change our IReRaiseException registration anyway (at least, 
>   probably, when it comes to a ZTK-KGS compatibility redesign of grok). 
>   So maybe we should wait until this zope.publisher change (which is 
>   likely to come) arrived? 

I'm not sure this particular proposal would help much in fixing JW's 
issue, though...

> Overall +0.5 for the change.

I'm on the fence on configuring things when the WSGI app is set up too. 
It'll obscure the place of configuration as it won't be grokked or 
coming through ZCML...



More information about the Grok-dev mailing list