On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 6:32 AM, Christoph Zwerschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chuck Esterbrook wrote: >> But I was a little surprised that after all the work you recently put >> in, you would then immediately outline a roadmap that sounds like "how >> to evaporate Webware" at which point its hard to imagine using 1.0 for >> anything. I *wasn't* surprised when several unsubscribes followed your >> message. If sub 3.0 focuses on removing non-WebKit items and 3.0 gets >> rid of the app server, then what is left at the end of the road? > > Maybe I did not use the right wording. What I wanted to get across was > not "how to evaporate Webware" but "how to keep Webware alive and > support exisiting Webware apps as long as possible" given the currently > available resources (e.g. mainly my own limited amount of time). > > Concerning the app server, it will still remain in 1.x and be usable for > many years. In 3.x it will not be needed any more, because Webware will > then support WSGI and you will be able to connect directly to Apache or > any webserver with WSGI suport. > > And what alternative do we have? WebKit's ThreadedAppServer has hit the > wall built by the GIL (which will stay in Py 3.0) on multicore machines. > So we would need to develop another MultiProcessAppServer. We'd also > need to maintain mod_webkit and the other adapters for our AppServer to > make them run with newer Apache versions or modern web servers such as > lighttpd, nginx or cherokee. That would be a huge effort and I currently > don't see a compelling reason and people supporting this idea. > > I think the causal connection is inverse: People do not unsubscribe > because Webware will not be expanded, but Webware cannot be expanded > because developers and users lost interest (already some years ago). > ...
I was referring to the rash of unsubscribes that followed shortly after the roadmap. >> I agree with the 1.1 idea of removing support for old versions of Python. > > By that I mean that I also want to make use of newer Python features so > that the code will look less ugly and become more performant. Yes, didn't mean to imply otherwise, although I can see that I did. > These are things I already planned to implement in upcoming versions. > This would also allow us to optionally print deprecation warnings when > the old names are used and make migration much easier. The old names > could then be phased out in version 3.0 or 4.0 or so. Or we could support the fooBar names for people who prefer them. :-) Python's approach of naming is still odd and inconsistent. Consider dictionary with fromkeys, has_key and popitem. Which is it? "foobar" or "foo_bar"? Maybe they cleaned that up in 3.0; I haven't checked. >> Had I put more consistent effort into Webware through the years, >> including updating it with the times, then it might have become the >> premiere app server for the Python community. > > Your departure certainly was the main reason why Webware stalled after > the 0.8.1 release and never really regained momentum after that. It's > always a big problem and a challenge if the original founder and owner > of a project phases out. > > I saw the same happening with TurboGears which is also moving moving > forward very bumpily after Kevin Dangoor left. That's not meant as an > accusation; it just seems you or Kevin are persons who like tackling > huge, venturous projects such as Webware (or even Cobra) more than the > continuous maintenance and boring detail work once the main work is > done. Open source actually needs both kinds of people. I did plenty of maintenance work on Webware after it became usable and was in production environments. As explained in my previous message, I became convinced we could do better than Python and subsequently started Cobra. And I continue to do plenty of detail work on Cobra including bug fixes and code cleanup. >> In addition to moving towards Cobra 1.0, I'm also looking to make it >> multibackend starting with JVM support and following that with a cross >> VM library (VM = Virtual Machine as in .NET or JVM). It will then >> become interesting to ask if there should be a cross VM app server... >> a Webware for Cobra. > > So that may become the real replacement for Webware's appserver then :-) :-) -Chuck -- http://cobra-language.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ _______________________________________________ Webware-devel mailing list Webware-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-devel
