Graham Dumpleton wrote: > For example, consider an extreme case such as WSGI. > Through a goal of WSGI being portability it effectively > ignores practically everything that Apache has to offer. > Thus although Apache offers support for authentication > and authorisation, a WSGI user would have to implement > this functionality themselves or use a third party WSGI > component that does it for them. Another example is > Apache's support for enabling compression of content > returned to a client. The WSGI approach is again to > duplicate that functionality. Similarly with other Apache > features such as URL rewriting, proxying, caching etc etc.
Well, almost. I use Auth* directives for authentication (and the Require directive for authorization) with my CherryPy apps. Many other CP users use mod_rewrite and mod_proxy. So the WSGI user doesn't *have* to implement that functionality themselves. Any sufficiently-messianic framework will probably do so ;), but even the best admit there are always alternatives. Robert Brewer System Architect Amor Ministries [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list