On 2012-03-31, at 05:27 , PJ Eby wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Sasha Hart wrote:
>
>> I do really like the idea of having a quick WSGI runner in the stdlib,
>>
> Regarding modules vs. files, I don't really care that much which way the
> capability is spelled, as long as the file vs.
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Masklinn wrote:
> On 2012-03-30, at 20:22 , Sasha Hart wrote:
> >
> > I am finding more reasons to dislike that -m:
> >
> >python -m wsgiref.simple_server -m blog app
> >
> > Beyond looking a little stuttery, it's really unclear. Anyone could be
> > forgiven f
On 2 April 2012 14:54, Sasha Hart wrote:
> I would personally not +x a module file just to serve an app with wsgiref
> from the hashbang line; it's clever but I can't come up with any real
> benefit. A case where I'm serving with wsgiref already has to be pretty
> trivial and I'm not going to coup
On 2 April 2012 15:08, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
> On 2 April 2012 14:54, Sasha Hart wrote:
>> I would personally not +x a module file just to serve an app with wsgiref
>> from the hashbang line; it's clever but I can't come up with any real
>> benefit. A case where I'm serving with wsgiref already
