On 3/8/10 5:23 PM, Andrey Popp wrote: >> - a behavior change that may break folks who already rely on middleware >> to convert webob exceptions to responses. > > It is reasonable -1 for my proposal.
FTR, bw compat is about the weakest argument, I think. Backwards compatibility can always be sacrificed as long as the docs spell out how to fix things for upgraders. >> It just becomes a bit of a rabbit hole. The rabbit hole is avoided entirely >> if the we document that people should just put the >> webob.exc.HTTPExceptionMiddleware middleware into their WSGI pipeline if >> they want WebOb exceptions to be converted to responses. > > Yes, it would be great, cause I did not know about existence of that > middleware before start of our discussion. I'll try to add it somewhere in the docs, or at least somewhere in http://bfg.repoze.org/tutorialbin. By the way, have you tried it? It looks like it should work... > >> OTOH, it'd be reasonable to provide a generic "exception view" facility like >> Zope's where users can map any exception type to a particular view; this is >> definitely less adhoc and requires less documentation. I'd be +1 on such a >> feature, I think. At least without thinking about it really hard at the >> moment. ;-) > > I was thinking of this too — it is good to return control back to > application during handling of this kind of errors (4xx). Also it will > convert notfound/forbidden views from special cases of Router > processing cycle to special cases of "exception view". > Right, I think it makes sense... do you think you might want to take a stab at implementing that? -- Chris McDonough Agendaless Consulting, Fredericksburg VA The repoze.bfg Web Application Framework Book: http://bfg.repoze.org/book _______________________________________________ Repoze-dev mailing list Repozeemail@example.com http://lists.repoze.org/listinfo/repoze-dev