I fully support it!
Massimo
On Sep 15, 2010, at 6:03 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
A PEP was submitted and accepted today for a WSGI successor protocol
named Web3:
http://python.org/dev/peps/pep-0444/
I'd encourage other folks to suggest improvements to that spec or to
submit a competing spec,
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Massimo Di Pierro
mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote:
I fully support it!
I don't entirely. I don't quite agree with the key changes from wsgi
to web3. I think it's unnecessary.
cheers
james
--
-- James Mills
--
-- Problems are solved by method
At 07:03 PM 9/15/2010 -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
A PEP was submitted and accepted today for a WSGI successor protocol
named Web3:
http://python.org/dev/peps/pep-0444/
I'd encourage other folks to suggest improvements to that spec or to
submit a competing spec, so we can get WSGI-on-Python3
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 20:05 -0400, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 07:03 PM 9/15/2010 -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
A PEP was submitted and accepted today for a WSGI successor protocol
named Web3:
http://python.org/dev/peps/pep-0444/
I'd encourage other folks to suggest improvements to that spec or to
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:02 AM, John Nagle na...@animats.com wrote:
On 9/15/2010 4:44 PM, python-dev-requ...@python.org wrote:
``SERVER_PORT`` must be a bytes instance (not an integer).
What's that supposed to mean? What goes in the bytes
instance? A character string in some format? A
It's, e.g.
b'8080'
.. instead of the integer value 8080.
Apparently the type of this value was not spelled out sufficiently in
the WSGI spec and string values and integer values were used
interchangeably, making it harder to join them with the other values in
the environ (a common thing to want
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com wrote:
It's, e.g.
b'8080'
.. instead of the integer value 8080.
Apparently the type of this value was not spelled out sufficiently in
the WSGI spec and string values and integer values were used
interchangeably, making it
A PEP was submitted and accepted today for a WSGI successor protocol
named Web3:
http://python.org/dev/peps/pep-0444/
I'd encourage other folks to suggest improvements to that spec or to
submit a competing spec, so we can get WSGI-on-Python3 settled soon.
- C
I generally like it.
