Hello, Jari.
I'd recommend using twod.wsgi instead: http://bitbucket.org/2degrees/twod.wsgi/
It's very stable, full-feature and truly WSGI compliant. We've been
using heavily over the last 2 months. It started from this:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Forest Bond wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:09:29AM -0800, mrts wrote:
>> You don't need that fix to use efficient file serving.
>>
>> Just use an empty response and set the X-Sendfile header manually if
>> using
>> Apache.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:09 PM, Jari Pennanen wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I was wondering what is the status of branch branches/soc2009/http-
> wsgi-improvements (
> http://github.com/django/django/tree/soc2009/http-wsgi-improvements
> )? I'm personally interested one bug it
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:09:29AM -0800, mrts wrote:
> On Feb 10, 5:24 pm, Tom Evans wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Jari Pennanen
> > wrote:
> > > Hi!
> >
> > > I was wondering what is the status of branch
On Feb 10, 5:24 pm, Tom Evans wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Jari Pennanen
> wrote:
> > Hi!
>
> > I was wondering what is the status of branch branches/soc2009/http-
> > wsgi-improvements
> >
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Jari Pennanen wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I was wondering what is the status of branch branches/soc2009/http-
> wsgi-improvements (
> http://github.com/django/django/tree/soc2009/http-wsgi-improvements
> )? I'm personally interested one bug it
Hi!
I was wondering what is the status of branch branches/soc2009/http-
wsgi-improvements (
http://github.com/django/django/tree/soc2009/http-wsgi-improvements
)? I'm personally interested one bug it fixes, mainly ticket #2131
( http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2131 )
The branch seems to be