It still looks like an application of WSGI, not part of a reference
implementation.
It seems to me that canonical exemplars are part of what a reference
implementation should include. Otherwise it would be a standard
implementation, which is considerably different.
Bill
Guido van Rossum wrote:
PEP 333 specifies WSGI, the Python Web Server Gateway Interface v1.0;
it's written by Phillip Eby who put a lot of effort in it to make it
acceptable to very diverse web frameworks. The PEP has been well
received by web framework makers and users.
As a supplement to
Guido van Rossum wrote:
I think another useful addition would be some prefix-based dispatcher,
similar to paste.urlmap (but probably a bit simpler):
http://svn.pythonpaste.org/Paste/trunk/paste/urlmap.py
IMO this is getting into framework design. Perhaps something like this
could be added
It still looks like an application of WSGI, not part of a reference
implementation. Multiple apps looks like an advanced topic to me; more
something that the infrastructure (Apache server or whatever) ought to
take care of.
I don't expect you to agree with me. But I don't expect you to be able
to
Guido van Rossum wrote:
It still looks like an application of WSGI, not part of a reference
implementation. Multiple apps looks like an advanced topic to me; more
something that the infrastructure (Apache server or whatever) ought to
take care of.
I don't understand the distinction between
At 01:19 PM 4/28/2006 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
It still looks like an application of WSGI, not part of a reference
implementation. Multiple apps looks like an advanced topic to me; more
something that the infrastructure (Apache server or whatever) ought to
take care of.
I'm fine with a
On 4/28/06, Phillip J. Eby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it's small enough, I'd say to add this mapper to wsgiref.util, or if
Guido is strongly set against it being in the code, we should at least put
it in the documentation as an example of how to use 'shift_path_info()' in
wsgiref.util.
I'm
