Hmmm. I guess Channel is doing more than just websockets, but I've always thought it had good docs... Anyhow...
We'll see how the Async work goes, but a lot of channel will end up being absorbed into Django itself. What, at this point, I guess that will leave is "just" the websocket bit. (Maybe the Channel Layers bit... too but maybe that would/could be separate.) Hopefully this'll make it more focused and easier to follow But... I think websockets haven't turned out to be the One True Hammer people thought. (They're not that popular actually, it seems...) So I'm not sure we'd include support in core (vs keeping it in the third-party package.) I guess something to revisit after 3.0. Kind Regards, Carlton On Thursday, 1 August 2019 15:09:21 UTC+2, Confi Yobo wrote: > > This might be a little redundant as you would say but i see importance in > it. > > Django should come chipped in with websocket implementation rather > developers using third party libraries like django-channels which are > difficult and most at times have poor documentation. I have seen many cases > where developers want to build an application that requires websocket they > use another web framework. > > So in my opinion and that of few other developers i'v seen i think > websocket feature should be added to django out of the box(something like > socket.io would make a lot of sense). > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/c561814d-941c-446f-8707-c2ef1ce8170e%40googlegroups.com.
