On 09/20/2014 02:31 AM, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
The problem with trying to overhaul WSGI is that if it is done in an open forum
like the Web-SIG it will die of a thousand cuts, as past efforts to update it
in even minor ways have suffered.
The only way that WSGI itself will ever see an overhaul is through the strong
willed determination of a few people off list, out of sight, to allow it it to
be fully fleshed out, with input coming from direct consultation with and
review by other related parties who have a vested interested or significant
experience in the area.
I may be up for such an off list effort, but be warned I may want to run
roughshod over it and exert quite a lot of influence over the process and
outcome.
I'm no one important in the Python world, but, FWIW, I agree with you.
I've followed your work over the years and believe you have a penchant
for details and accuracy as evidenced by your comments here on the list
and your work on modwsgi and wrapt. I'd be very interested in seeing
what you could come up with.
IMO, if you are up for it, you should feel free to grab a few people
that you would like to work with and hammer out a PEP (or it's
precursor). Then, let the PEP process work as it's intended to.
Hopefully, this method results in a trend towards more concrete and
specific arguments and less likely to "die of a thousand cuts."
I'm going to refer this group as the "draft team."
On 20 September 2014 19:14, Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com> wrote:
I would prefer to have this work being done transparently. If we do it
rationally it could work imo.
I don't think anyone is arguing against transparency. But momentum
matters and, in the history of changes to the WSGI spec, momentum has
died pretty easily even when there were clearly changes that needed to
be made. If Graham, or anyone else for that matter, has the gumption to
go at this thing hard and get something written down, I think that that
should be encouraged.
Even if the initial phases of that processes are behind closed doors,
transparency will come eventually and there will be opportunity for
comment.
But if you make the process too transparent too early, the energy used
to keep up with everyone and all the different needs can take away from
doing the actual work of defining the spec.
got an idea. What about having a page collecting feedback from anyone
in the python community about this topic. So we can have true data
from different perspectives: developer, library/framework author,
server author. I'm OK to collect the data from it and make a summary
of it once it's done.
This seems reasonable. That way, interested parties could get their
comments "on record" without the draft team needing to feel like that
have to satisfy or even have a discussion about every comment.
The form it could take should be discussed first but imo that a good
way to engage the community. What do you think?
I'd suggest a "wsgi comments" github repo.
Workflow:
* Submit a document to the repo with your comments on the future
version of WSGI
o use any readable format you want (Markdown, RST, plain text, etc.).
o include name, contact information, background. Make sure to
give enough info about your background so the draft team has
some context for the proposals and comments you are making.
* Any desired discussion by interested parties can be had on the pull
request page (or here I guess, but that might be noisy)
* The author can update pull request if desired based on discussion
* pull requests are automatically accepted after some time period (1
week?) of no further comments
o the delay in acceptance is to give time for discussion and
updates to the PR
o a PR merge does not indicate that the idea will be accepted into
the WSGI PEP, it's just being merged into the comments repo
* an individual should only update their own document, no PRs against
someone else's document.
o comments/discussions should go on the PR
Just my $0.02.
*Randy Syring*
Husband | Father | Redeemed Sinner
/"For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world
and forfeit his soul?" (Mark 8:36 ESV)/
_______________________________________________
Web-SIG mailing list
Web-SIG@python.org
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
