Anything that claims any sort of support for WGSI 2 should be avoided as there is no such thing as WSGI 2, nor are there any blessed async extensions for WSGI.
Graham On Dec 28, 6:16 am, dm73 <miedema.do...@gmail.com> wrote: > May be marrow.server.http?https://github.com/marrow/marrow.server.http#readme > > " > The marrow.server.http package is a full-featured HTTP/1.1 compliant > web server hosting WSGI 2 applications. It is: > > * Based on a modified version of Tornado’s IOLoop/IOStream > architecture. > * Faster than the competition by a significant margin. > * Simple and efficient by design, allowing rapid development and > easy bug fixing. (The protocol itself is only ~170 statements!) > * Internally asynchronous. WSGI 2 applications will be able to > benefit from this when wsgi.async is better defined. > * Compatible with Python 2.6+ and 3.1+ out of the box; no need for > automated conversion scripts or maintaining two separate code trees. > * A fully unit tested protocol on both Python 2.6+ and 3.1+. > (Excluding code specific to the other version.) > > " > > On 24 dec, 21:05, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know of a pure-Python WSGI server that: > > > - Is distributed indepdently from a web framework or larger whole. > > > - Runs on UNIX and Windows. > > > - Runs on both Python 2 and Python 3. > > > - Has good test coverage. > > > - Is useful in production. > > > - C -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
