Hi all,
It was great to meet (nearly) everybody at PyCon; I look forward to
the next time.
I particularly want to thank Robert for being so meticulous about
recording and reporting the discussions; a necessary part of moving
forward, IMO.
[Robert]
> H. Graham brought up chunked requests whic
2009/3/28 Robert Brewer :
> H. Graham brought up chunked requests which I don't think have much
> bearing on this issue--the server/app can't rely on the client-specified
> chunk sizes either way (or you enable a Denial of Service attack). I
> don't see much difference between the file approach
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 18:46, Eric Larson wrote:
> Seeing as this tuple idea is low hanging fruit, I went ahead and
> created a small bit of middleware for making the conversion.
>
> http://bitbucket.org/elarson/pack/wiki/Home
>
> Hope it helps!
If I'm not missing some quirk about some older Pyt
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Robert Brewer wrote:
> Alan Kennedy wrote:
>> For those of you at PyCon, there is a WSGI Open Space @ 5pm today
>> (Friday).
>>
>> The sub-title of the open space is "Does WSGI need revision"?
>
> Hi all,
>
> We had a good meeting but it was too short. We pla
At 03:43 PM 3/30/2009 +0300, Sergey Schetinin wrote:
Did you consider a variation that eliminates the start_response but
returns status and headers as first item of the iterable? Considering
how response is usually generated it could save some code in some
cases and wouldn't add any overhead in o
(Sorry if this is a duplicate message).
> Topic: Return a tuple of (status, headers, body)
>
>
> That is, get rid of the start_response callable. The general consensus
> was that this is a simple, but powerful improvement, which Rack/Jack
> have dem
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 14:14, Graham Dumpleton
wrote:
> 2009/3/30 Ionel Maries Cristian :
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 03:13, Graham Dumpleton
>> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> The problem with this is what happens if a WSGI middleware tries to do
>>> something with it. If the separate change is made to a
2009/3/30 Ionel Maries Cristian :
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 03:13, Graham Dumpleton
> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> The problem with this is what happens if a WSGI middleware tries to do
>> something with it. If the separate change is made to allow string like
>> objects to be returned instead of only strin
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 03:13, Graham Dumpleton
wrote:
[...]
> The problem with this is what happens if a WSGI middleware tries to do
> something with it. If the separate change is made to allow string like
> objects to be returned instead of only string objects, then its string
> like behaviour
