On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Graham Dumpleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Personally I believe that WSGI 1.0 should die along with Python 2.X. I > believe that WSGI 2.0 should be developed to replace it and the > introduction of Python 3.0 would be a great time to do that given that > people are going to have to change their code anyway and that code > isn't then likely to be backward compatible with Python 2.X.
The sooner WSGI 2 becomes standard and WSGI 1 dies, the better. I don't understand why the basic premise of WSGI 2 has been around for two years but there's still no PEP, forcing people to write convoluted WSGI 1 middlewares and worry about edge cases. (WSGI 2, according to most proposals, simplifies the protocol to a straightforward function call: app(environ) => response, headers, content_iterable eliminating the callback function and .write method that were intended for asynchronous servers but turned out not to be suitable for that (or for anything else). -- Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
