At 04:15 PM 12/26/2007 +1100, Graham Dumpleton wrote: >On 26/12/2007, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 12:28 PM 12/24/2007 +0100, Manlio Perillo wrote: > > >By the way: isn't it better to first release a WSGI 1.1 before > > >jumping to a (incompatible) WSGI 2.0? > > > > Better for whom, and for what purpose? > >As has been pointed out before, the main discrepancy known of is the >definition of readline() on wsgi.input. Don't know of anything that >implements it per the specification because if it was written per the >specification then cgi.FieldStorage wouldn't work. > >The other more recent issue is how to interpret the WSGI specification >for Python 3. > >Personally I don't think it is sufficient that the only mention of >these issues is in the archives of the mailing list. Even if you >personally don't want a version 1.1 specification, would you consider >an official addendum to the 1.0 specification with it being at least >posted on www.wsgi.org if the PEP itself can't be amended.
These are good things to have, sure. But this doesn't answer the question of why doing that first would be *better* than doing 2.0 first, assuming that there is any reason why they can't or shouldn't be worked on concurrently. _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list [email protected] Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
