On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Graham Dumpleton <graham.dumple...@gmail.com> wrote: > In short, it is all a mess and trying to provide support for it in one bit > of code is possibly asking a bit much.
One possible solution would be to split the problem up a bit. Django could provide an HttpFileResponse object. This would use the new lazy response mechanism in 1.3 to render the file locally (by doing a naive open/read) on demand. But then we could also ship a collection of middleware classes that know how to translate a HttpFileResponse for each various backend (FileResponseToXSendFile, FileResponseToXAccell, etc). Users could then select the correct piece of middleware for their upstream server or write their own for ones not supported out of the box. The nice thing about this approach is that it could be explored as a third-party app and made available to anyone using 1.3 or above. Can anyone see a reason why this wouldn't work? Want to throw some code together and give it a try? Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
