> They're not that popular actually, it seems...
They might become more popular, when they work behind proxies ... a limitation
which you usually figure out after your first important client tries to connect
from behind their corporate proxy, then you can implement polling again - a
fallback
Ok
On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 6:07 PM Carlton Gibson
wrote:
>
> On 10 Aug 2019, at 18:51, Confi Yobo wrote:
>
> So it should not be expected in 3.0? @ Carlton Gibson
>
>
> No. As per the previous comments, it’s not something likely to be included
> in core. Certainly not for 3.0.
>
> --
> You
>
> On 10 Aug 2019, at 18:51, Confi Yobo wrote:
>
> So it should not be expected in 3.0? @ Carlton Gibson
No. As per the previous comments, it’s not something likely to be included in
core. Certainly not for 3.0.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
So it should not be expected in 3.0? @ Carlton Gibson
On Thursday, August 1, 2019 at 2:09:21 PM UTC+1, 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
So it should not be expected in future release?
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:14 PM Andrew Godwin wrote:
> Unfortunately, from my perspective, websocket support is tricky enough
> that it's at least not on the short-term plan to bake into Django; it's
> used by only a small fraction of our users,
Unfortunately, from my perspective, websocket support is tricky enough that
it's at least not on the short-term plan to bake into Django; it's used by
only a small fraction of our users, and the Channels project is an official
Django project, so it's as close as we can get so far. Future Django
And socket.io kind of implementation is one thing developers from js like
us are missing in django.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 8:58 PM Confi Yobo wrote:
> Please consider it, cause the procedures of using third party websocket
> library (mostly for production) is cumbersome
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019
Please consider it, cause the procedures of using third party websocket
library (mostly for production) is cumbersome
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 2:22 PM Carlton Gibson
wrote:
> Hmmm. I guess Channel is doing more than just websockets, but I've always
> thought it had good docs... Anyhow...
>
>
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.
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
10 matches
Mail list logo
