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 the PEP, Phillip has written a reference > implementation, "wsgiref". I don't know how many people have used > wsgiref; I'm using it myself for an intranet webserver and am very > happy with it. (I'm asking Phillip to post the URL for the current > source; searching for it produces multiple repositories.) > > I believe that it would be a good idea to add wsgiref to the stdlib, > after some minor cleanups such as removing the extra blank lines that > Phillip puts in his code. Having standard library support will remove > the last reason web framework developers might have to resist adopting > WSGI, and the resulting standardization will help web framework users.
I'd like to include paste.lint with that as well (as wsgiref.lint or whatever). Since the last discussion I enumerated in the docstring all the checks it does. There's still some outstanding issues, mostly where I'm not sure if it is too restrictive (marked with @@ in the source). It's at: http://svn.pythonpaste.org/Paste/trunk/paste/lint.py 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 The motivation there is to give people the basic tools to simple multi-application hosting, and in the process implicitly suggest how other dispatching can be done. I think this is something that doesn't occur to people naturally, and they see it as a flaw in the server (that the server doesn't have a dispatching feature), and the result is either frustration, griping, or bad kludges. By including a basic implementation of WSGI-based dispatching the standard library can lead people in the right direction for more sophisticated dispatching. And prefix dispatching is also quite useful on its own, it's not just educational. > Last time this was brought up there were feature requests and > discussion on how "industrial strength" the webserver in wsgiref ought > to be but nothing like the flamefest that setuptools caused (no > comments please). No one disagreed with the basic premise though, just some questions about the particulars of the server. I think there were at least a couple small suggestions for the wsgiref server; in particular maybe a slight refactoring to make it easier to use with https. -- Ian Bicking / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://blog.ianbicking.org _______________________________________________ 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