On 13 April 2010 00:39, Manlio Perillo wrote:
> P.J. Eby ha scritto:
>> At 01:25 PM 4/12/2010 +0200, Manlio Perillo wrote:
>>> The purpose of the extension if to just have a standard interface that
>>> WSGI applications can use to take advantage of the possibility, offered
>>> by asynchronous serv
P.J. Eby ha scritto:
> At 01:25 PM 4/12/2010 +0200, Manlio Perillo wrote:
>> The purpose of the extension if to just have a standard interface that
>> WSGI applications can use to take advantage of the possibility, offered
>> by asynchronous server, to suspend execution and resume it later.
>
> WS
At 01:25 PM 4/12/2010 +0200, Manlio Perillo wrote:
The purpose of the extension if to just have a standard interface that
WSGI applications can use to take advantage of the possibility, offered
by asynchronous server, to suspend execution and resume it later.
WSGI has this ability now - it's yi
Graham Dumpleton ha scritto:
> [...]
>>
>> Claiming that x-wsgiorg.suspend does not help writing portable WSGI
>> application is something similar (well, I'm a bit exaggerating here) of
>> saying that WSGI does not allow to write portable web applications,
>> because real world WSGI applications ne
On 12 April 2010 21:25, Manlio Perillo wrote:
> Graham Dumpleton ha scritto:
>> On 12 April 2010 06:07, Manlio Perillo wrote:
>>> I'm not sure about the correct procedure to follow, I hope it is not a
>>> problem.
>>>
>>> I here propose the x-wsgiorg.suspend to be accepted as official WSGI
>>> ex
Graham Dumpleton ha scritto:
> On 12 April 2010 06:07, Manlio Perillo wrote:
>> I'm not sure about the correct procedure to follow, I hope it is not a
>> problem.
>>
>> I here propose the x-wsgiorg.suspend to be accepted as official WSGI
>> extension, using the wsgiorg namespace.
>>
First of all
