On Sunday, 31 May 2015 16:52:50 UTC+2, Rotund wrote: > > The fact that you keep describing your idea as another process/thread that > has back and forth communication with the actual Django instance seems to > indicate to me that it's another program. >
Yes, I was not clear about the distinction between separate process and separate program. I see this as a separate UNIX process. > I think people here tend to follow more of the UNIX philosophy of a > collection of smaller simple programs that can easily interact (monolithic > stack being ignored as that's a much older decision). > Isn't this exactly what I'm proposing? A small simple program that gives Django users access to server sent events in their Django project? > If you want tighter integration with Django, I think it would best be done > via your program instead of Django itself. > I don't think whether this program is inside Django or not changes the technical implementation. I fully agree that this could be developed as a separate project, but I also think that Django as a project would benefit from including this and giving people a way to do async without needing on external dependencies. The whole batteries included applied to modern sites. I believe the problem here is that if Django keeps pushing away from things you need for JS heavy sites, it will slowly become irrelevant. Keep up the good work. > Thanks! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/c8b33314-a227-4126-9618-a62bce1e0f13%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
