I'd very much like to see a _usable_ WSGI server included in the standard Python library: I don't care how it is done.
It should have a few requirements: - it should obviously implement all of WSGI that is required by a server implementation; - it should be stand-alone, only dependent upon Python's built-in BaseHTTPServer (not SimpleHTTPServer, for obvious reasons); - it should _not_ have any functionality beyond the minimums required by WSGI: specificially, it should not handle multiple WSGI applications (routing), nor should it include file downloading; - it should be implemented as a Mix-In so that you can use it /w any derivitive of BaseHTTPServer (for example one using SSL); - it should be accompanied by a SSL enabled server built upon BaseHTTPServer (and perhaps fix a few bugs in BaseHTTPServer); - it should fully support HTTP/1.1, including Chunked-Encoding, 100-Continue, and degrade to HTTP/1.0 if Content-Length is not provided in a Client's request; - it should take into account design "insights" found in various currently competing WSGI servers; and finally, - it *must* be heavily tested -- ideally, already in production setting to identify issues that can be missed. I wrote paste.httpserver not beacuse I needed to kill a week of my life, I did it beacuse most of the servers out there didn't do this sort of stuff and beacause I got tired of dealing with broken code. You're welcome to use paste.httpserver, or not use it. I'd suggest looking at all possible servers out there, and stealing the best peices/ideas from each one. I will gladly lead such an effort if it is deemed appropriate. Best, Clark _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com