Re: Is wsgi ready for prime time?
On May 18, 5:31 am, Stefan Sonnenberg-Carstens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMHO WSGI is _only_ a new way of talking to webservers, like apache. > It is as low-level as (f)cgi, so don't expect too much support at this > stage - > indeed a module like the cgi one in the std lib would be nice. > As google uses it (mod_wsgi), I would suspect you can use it. So people don't get the wrong impression, mod_wsgi is merely hosted on the Google code site. This does not mean that Google uses it, nor does Google have anything to do with its development. Graham -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is wsgi ready for prime time?
On May 18, 5:31 am, Stefan Sonnenberg-Carstens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMHO WSGI is _only_ a new way of talking to webservers, like apache. > It is as low-level as (f)cgi, so don't expect too much support at this > stage - > indeed a module like the cgi one in the std lib would be nice. > As google uses it (mod_wsgi), I would suspect you can use it. So people don't get the wrong impression, mod_wsgi is merely hosted on the Google code site. This does not mean that Google uses it, nor does Google have anything to do with its development. Graham -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is wsgi ready for prime time?
Ron Garret wrote: wsgiref.util > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "", line 1, in > AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'util' wsgiref.headers > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "", line 1, in > AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'headers' wsgiref.handlers > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "", line 1, in > AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'handlers' wsgiref is a package. In order to access submodules/packages, you must import them. >>> import wsgiref >>> wsgiref.util Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'util' >>> import wsgiref.util >>> wsgiref.util >>> It's almost magic. - Josiah -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is wsgi ready for prime time?
Ron Garret wrote in news:rNOSPAMon-B77D6B.12263417052007 @news.gha.chartermi.net in comp.lang.python: >> PACKAGE CONTENTS >> handlers >> headers >> simple_server >> util >> validate >> >> Reading the documentation can be useful sometimes. Recommending >> http://docs.python.org/lib/module-wsgiref.html, too. > > I did read the documentation, but the documentation does not seem to > reflect reality, e.g.: > wsgiref.util > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "", line 1, in > AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'util' > IDLE 1.2 >>> import wsgiref.util >>> wsgiref.util >>> Rob. -- http://www.victim-prime.dsl.pipex.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is wsgi ready for prime time?
Michele Simionato schrieb: > On May 17, 8:09 pm, Ron Garret <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The wsgiref module in Python 2.5 seems to be empty: >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Sites/modpy]$ python >> Python 2.5 (r25:51908, Mar 1 2007, 10:09:05) >> [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5367)] on darwin >> Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.>>> >> import wsgiref >> > dir(wsgiref) > >> ['__builtins__', '__doc__', '__file__', '__name__', '__path__'] >> >> >> >> So... is wsgi considered ready for production use, or is it still on the >> bleeding edge? And if the former, which implementation should one use? >> >> rg >> > > > Try help(wsgiref). > > I would say that WSGI (the spec) is ready for production use whereas > wsgiref > (the implementation in the standard library) is intended for easy > development > and testing purposes, not for industrial strenght deployement. On the > other hand Zope 3 uses Twisted via WSGI as a business class server, > and I hear that mod_wsgi is slightly more performant than mod_python, > It is not only _slightly_ faster. It is a beast. > so those are the first options I would consider. But you could post on > the WSGI list for more. > >Michele Simionato > > IMHO WSGI is _only_ a new way of talking to webservers, like apache. It is as low-level as (f)cgi, so don't expect too much support at this stage - indeed a module like the cgi one in the std lib would be nice. As google uses it (mod_wsgi), I would suspect you can use it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is wsgi ready for prime time?
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stargaming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ron Garret wrote: > > The wsgiref module in Python 2.5 seems to be empty: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Sites/modpy]$ python > > Python 2.5 (r25:51908, Mar 1 2007, 10:09:05) > > [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5367)] on darwin > > Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. > > > import wsgiref > dir(wsgiref) > > > > ['__builtins__', '__doc__', '__file__', '__name__', '__path__'] > > > > > > So... is wsgi considered ready for production use, or is it still on the > > bleeding edge? And if the former, which implementation should one use? > > > > rg > > >>> help(wsgiref) > Help on package wsgiref: > > NAME > wsgiref - wsgiref -- a WSGI (PEP 333) Reference Library > > DESCRIPTION > Current Contents: > > * util -- Miscellaneous useful functions and wrappers > > * headers -- Manage response headers > > * handlers -- base classes for server/gateway implementations > > * simple_server -- a simple BaseHTTPServer that supports WSGI > > * validate -- validation wrapper that sits between an app and a server >to detect errors in either > > To-Do: > > * cgi_gateway -- Run WSGI apps under CGI (pending a deployment > standard) > > * cgi_wrapper -- Run CGI apps under WSGI > > * router -- a simple middleware component that handles URL traversal > > PACKAGE CONTENTS > handlers > headers > simple_server > util > validate > > Reading the documentation can be useful sometimes. Recommending > http://docs.python.org/lib/module-wsgiref.html, too. I did read the documentation, but the documentation does not seem to reflect reality, e.g.: >>> wsgiref.util Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'util' >>> wsgiref.headers Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'headers' >>> wsgiref.handlers Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'handlers' >>> Hence my question. rg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is wsgi ready for prime time?
On May 17, 8:09 pm, Ron Garret <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The wsgiref module in Python 2.5 seems to be empty: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Sites/modpy]$ python > Python 2.5 (r25:51908, Mar 1 2007, 10:09:05) > [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5367)] on darwin > Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.>>> > import wsgiref > >>> dir(wsgiref) > > ['__builtins__', '__doc__', '__file__', '__name__', '__path__'] > > > > So... is wsgi considered ready for production use, or is it still on the > bleeding edge? And if the former, which implementation should one use? > > rg Try help(wsgiref). I would say that WSGI (the spec) is ready for production use whereas wsgiref (the implementation in the standard library) is intended for easy development and testing purposes, not for industrial strenght deployement. On the other hand Zope 3 uses Twisted via WSGI as a business class server, and I hear that mod_wsgi is slightly more performant than mod_python, so those are the first options I would consider. But you could post on the WSGI list for more. Michele Simionato -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is wsgi ready for prime time?
Ron Garret wrote: > The wsgiref module in Python 2.5 seems to be empty: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Sites/modpy]$ python > Python 2.5 (r25:51908, Mar 1 2007, 10:09:05) > [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5367)] on darwin > Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. > import wsgiref dir(wsgiref) > > ['__builtins__', '__doc__', '__file__', '__name__', '__path__'] > > > So... is wsgi considered ready for production use, or is it still on the > bleeding edge? And if the former, which implementation should one use? > > rg >>> help(wsgiref) Help on package wsgiref: NAME wsgiref - wsgiref -- a WSGI (PEP 333) Reference Library DESCRIPTION Current Contents: * util -- Miscellaneous useful functions and wrappers * headers -- Manage response headers * handlers -- base classes for server/gateway implementations * simple_server -- a simple BaseHTTPServer that supports WSGI * validate -- validation wrapper that sits between an app and a server to detect errors in either To-Do: * cgi_gateway -- Run WSGI apps under CGI (pending a deployment standard) * cgi_wrapper -- Run CGI apps under WSGI * router -- a simple middleware component that handles URL traversal PACKAGE CONTENTS handlers headers simple_server util validate Reading the documentation can be useful sometimes. Recommending http://docs.python.org/lib/module-wsgiref.html, too. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Is wsgi ready for prime time?
The wsgiref module in Python 2.5 seems to be empty: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Sites/modpy]$ python Python 2.5 (r25:51908, Mar 1 2007, 10:09:05) [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5367)] on darwin Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import wsgiref >>> dir(wsgiref) ['__builtins__', '__doc__', '__file__', '__name__', '__path__'] >>> So... is wsgi considered ready for production use, or is it still on the bleeding edge? And if the former, which implementation should one use? rg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
