Mike and Graham,

Many thanks for your replies. Glad to see the subject has some general
interest.  

>> Graham: The closest you can get is to use 404 or some other HTTP status.

Yes, I did see in Cascade where you can configure which HTTP statuses are
used for signaling. So when overloading 404 isn't OK, perhaps 501 Not
Implemented could be used. OTOH, one could envision situations where that
status needed to be retained for its true use. Leading to...

>> Graham: I too see the ability to cascade as possibly useful, but that one
has to overload on the return status as not being ideal. 

Agree there. One of my colleagues would say this overloading creates
cognitive friction, by using one thing to mean something else. Maybe a
pseudo HTTP response (599 Not My Job), or even forget the HTTP part and
raise a custom NotMyJobException that the cascade manager catches?

>> Mike: You don't have to use Cascade.  It exists only because people want
to overlay controllers and static files in the same URL space.

I wasn't even including static file serving, but I can see the point, as the
same middleware stack could apply to each. In our case, we have two
substantially separate applications but with the same user base and security
plan, such that they will share common middleware. Obviously we could
instead just wrap each application with the same middleware combination--and
we may do this--but there appear to be benefits to combining them in a
cascade-like scenario. Thus our interest.

>> Graham: I was querying about the same sort of functionality back in
2005...See:
>>  http://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/2005-July/001519.html
>>  http://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/2005-July/001525.html

Good reference. Thanks.

>> Mike: But if you start thinking about "Python apps inside a Python app",
>> that's something that's just starting to be discussed.  The thread
>> "Sites within sites" two weeks ago has more info.  Basically we've
>> come up with a couple strategies that might work but nobody has tested
>> them yet.

This is interesting and, oddly, it feels good that the discussion is just
getting started. Apps within apps, at least in WSGI space, could be
workable. Maybe a framework could provide general support for an app
containing sub-apps. When an app gets called, it gives its children (if any)
each a shot (like Cascade) and if none of them act, the parent takes its
shot. Just musing.

-- Randy


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to