==================
Features
--------
- New argument to ``repoze.bfg.configuration.Configurator.add_route``
and the ``route`` ZCML directive: ``traverse``. If you would like
to cause the ``context`` to be something other than the ``root``
object when this route matches, you can spell a traversal pattern as
the ``traverse`` argument. This traversal pattern will be used as
the traversal path: traversal will begin at the root object implied
by this route (either the global root, or the object returned by the
``factory`` associated with this route).
The syntax of the ``traverse`` argument is the same as it is for
``path``. For example, if the ``path`` provided is
``articles/:article/edit``, and the ``traverse`` argument provided
is ``/:article``, when a request comes in that causes the route to
match in such a way that the ``article`` match value is '1' (when
the request URI is ``/articles/1/edit``), the traversal path will be
generated as ``/1``. This means that the root object's
``__getitem__`` will be called with the name ``1`` during the
traversal phase. If the ``1`` object exists, it will become the
``context`` of the request. The Traversal narrative has more
information about traversal.
If the traversal path contains segment marker names which are not
present in the path argument, a runtime error will occur. The
``traverse`` pattern should not contain segment markers that do not
exist in the ``path``.
A similar combining of routing and traversal is available when a
route is matched which contains a ``*traverse`` remainder marker in
its path. The ``traverse`` argument allows you to associate route
patterns with an arbitrary traversal path without using a
``*traverse`` remainder marker; instead you can use other match
information.
Note that the ``traverse`` argument is ignored when attached to a
route that has a ``*traverse`` remainder marker in its path.
- A new method of the ``Configurator`` exists:
``set_request_factory``. If used, this method will set the factory
used by the ``repoze.bfg`` router to create all request objects.
- The ``Configurator`` constructor takes an additional argument:
``request_factory``. If used, this argument will set the factory
used by the ``repoze.bfg`` router to create all request objects.
- The ``Configurator`` constructor takes an additional argument:
``request_factory``. If used, this argument will set the factory
used by the ``repoze.bfg`` router to create all request objects.
- A new method of the ``Configurator`` exists:
``set_renderer_globals_factory``. If used, this method will set the
factory used by the ``repoze.bfg`` router to create renderer
globals.
- A new method of the ``Configurator`` exists: ``get_settings``. If
used, this method will return the current settings object (performs
the same job as the ``repoze.bfg.settings.get_settings`` API).
- The ``Configurator`` constructor takes an additional argument:
``renderer_globals_factory``. If used, this argument will set the
factory used by the ``repoze.bfg`` router to create renderer
globals.
- Add ``repoze.bfg.renderers.render``,
``repoze.bfg.renderers.render_to_response`` and
``repoze.bfg.renderers.get_renderer`` functions. These are
imperative APIs which will use the same rendering machinery used by
view configurations with a ``renderer=`` attribute/argument to
produce a rendering or renderer. Because these APIs provide a
central API for all rendering, they now form the preferred way to
perform imperative template rendering. Using functions named
``render_*`` from modules such as ``repoze.bfg.chameleon_zpt`` and
``repoze.bfg.chameleon_text`` is now discouraged (although not
deprecated). The code the backing older templating-system-specific
APIs now calls into the newer ``repoze.bfg.renderer`` code.
- The ``repoze.bfg.configuration.Configurator.testing_add_template``
has been renamed to ``testing_add_renderer``. A backwards
compatibility alias is present using the old name.
Documentation
-------------
- The ``Hybrid`` narrative chapter now contains a description of the
``traverse`` route argument.
- The ``Hooks`` narrative chapter now contains sections about
changing the request factory and adding a renderer globals factory.
- The API documentation includes a new module:
``repoze.bfg.renderers``.
- The ``Templates`` chapter was updated; all narrative that used
templating-specific APIs within examples to perform rendering (such
as the ``repoze.bfg.chameleon_zpt.render_template_to_response``
method) was changed to use ``repoze.bfg.renderers.render_*``
functions.
Bug Fixes
---------
- The ``header`` predicate (when used as either a view predicate or a
route predicate) had a problem when specified with a name/regex
pair. When the header did not exist in the headers dictionary, the
regex match could be fed ``None``, causing it to throw a
``TypeError: expected string or buffer`` exception. Now, the
predicate returns False as intended.
Deprecations
------------
- The ``repoze.bfg.renderers.rendered_response`` function was never an
official API, but may have been imported by extensions in the wild.
It is officially deprecated in this release. Use
``repoze.bfg.renderers.render_to_response`` instead.
- The following APIs are *documentation* deprecated (meaning they are
officially deprecated in documentation but do not raise a
deprecation error upon their usage, and may continue to work for an
indefinite period of time):
In the ``repoze.bfg.chameleon_zpt`` module: ``get_renderer``,
``get_template``, ``render_template``,
``render_template_to_response``. The suggested alternatives are
documented within the docstrings of those methods (which are still
present in the documentation).
In the ``repoze.bfg.chameleon_text`` module: ``get_renderer``,
``get_template``, ``render_template``,
``render_template_to_response``. The suggested alternatives are
documented within the docstrings of those methods (which are still
present in the documentation).
In general, to perform template-related functions, one should now
use the various methods in the ``repoze.bfg.renderers`` module.
Backwards Incompatibilities
---------------------------
- A new internal exception class (*not* an API) named
``repoze.bfg.exceptions.PredicateMismatch`` now exists. This
exception is currently raised when no constituent view of a
multiview can be called (due to no predicate match). Previously, in
this situation, a ``repoze.bfg.exceptions.NotFound`` was raised. We
provide backwards compatibility for code that expected a
``NotFound`` to be raised when no predicates match by causing
``repoze.bfg.exceptions.PredicateMismatch`` to inherit from
``NotFound``. This will cause any exception view registered for
``NotFound`` to be called when a predicate mismatch occurs, as was
the previous behavior.
There is however, one perverse case that will expose a backwards
incompatibility. If 1) you had a view that was registered as a
member of a multiview 2) this view explicitly raised a ``NotFound``
exception *in order to* proceed to the next predicate check in the
multiview, that code will now behave differently: rather than
skipping to the next view match, a NotFound will be raised to the
top-level exception handling machinery instead. For code to be
depending upon the behavior of a view raising ``NotFound`` to
proceed to the next predicate match, would be tragic, but not
impossible, given that ``NotFound`` is a public interface.
``repoze.bfg.exceptions.PredicateMismatch`` is not a public API and
cannot be depended upon by application code, so you should not
change your view code to raise ``PredicateMismatch``. Instead, move
the logic which raised the ``NotFound`` exception in the view out
into a custom view predicate.
- If, when you run your application's unit test suite under BFG 1.3, a
``KeyError`` naming a template or a ``ValueError`` indicating that a
'renderer factory' is not registered may is raised
(e.g. ``ValueError: No factory for renderer named '.pt' when looking
up karl.views:templates/snippets.pt``), you may need to perform some
extra setup in your test code.
The best solution is to use the
``repoze.bfg.configuration.Configurator.testing_add_renderer`` (or,
alternately the deprecated
``repoze.bfg.testing.registerTemplateRenderer`` or
``registerDummyRenderer``) API within the code comprising each
individual unit test suite to register a "dummy" renderer for each
of the templates and renderers used by code under test. For
example::
config = Configurator()
config.testing_add_renderer('karl.views:templates/snippets.pt')
This will register a basic dummy renderer for this particular
missing template. The ``testing_add_renderer`` API actually
*returns* the renderer, but if you don't care about how the render
is used, you don't care about having a reference to it either.
A more rough way to solve the issue exists. It causes the "real"
template implementations to be used while the system is under test,
which is suboptimal, because tests will run slower, and unit tests
won't actually *be* unit tests, but it is easier. Always ensure you
call the ``setup_registry()`` method of the Configurator . Eg::
reg = MyRegistry()
config = Configurator(registry=reg)
config.setup_registry()
Calling ``setup_registry`` only has an effect if you're *passing in*
a ``registry`` argument to the Configurator constructor.
``setup_registry`` is called by the course of normal operations
anyway if you do not pass in a ``registry``.
If your test suite isn't using a Configurator yet, and is still
using the older ``repoze.bfg.testing`` APIs name ``setUp`` or
``cleanUp``, these will register the renderers on your behalf.
A variant on the symptom for this theme exists: you may already be
dutifully registering a dummy template or renderer for a template
used by the code you're testing using ``testing_register_renderer``
or ``registerTemplateRenderer``, but (perhaps unbeknownst to you)
the code under test expects to be able to use a "real" template
renderer implementation to retrieve or render *another* template
that you forgot was being rendered as a side effect of calling the
code you're testing. This happened to work because it found the
*real* template while the system was under test previously, and now
it cannot. The solution is the same.
It may also help reduce confusion to use a *resource specification*
to specify the template path in the test suite and code rather than
a relative path in either. A resource specification is unambiguous,
while a relative path needs to be relative to "here", where "here"
isn't always well-defined ("here" in a test suite may or may not be
the same as "here" in the code under test).