Re: [Web-SIG] REMOTE_ADDR and proxys

2014-10-12 Thread Robert Collins
On 30 September 2014 11:47, Alan Kennedy wrote: > [Robert] >> So it sounds like it should be the responsibility of a middleware to >> renormalize the environment? > > In order for that to be the case, you have strictly define what > "normalization" means. For a given deployment its well defined.

Re: [Web-SIG] Draft 2: WSGI Response Upgrade Bridging

2014-10-12 Thread Robert Collins
On 11 October 2014 08:10, PJ Eby wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Graham Dumpleton > wrote: >> So PJE, please step back and do not go rushing out to create a PEP. That is >> the worst thing you could do at this point and will only serve to deter >> people from the community contributing

Re: [Web-SIG] Draft 2: WSGI Response Upgrade Bridging

2014-10-12 Thread Robert Collins
On 11 October 2014 01:56, Graham Dumpleton wrote: I've pushed up https://github.com/python-web-sig/wsgi-ng/commit/df51d7d6fd4faa4efbe397fda2c323932f967020 which hopefully addresses the process and clarity concerns you expressed. (If not please help me tweak it appropriately). -Rob _

Re: [Web-SIG] Draft 2: WSGI Response Upgrade Bridging

2014-10-12 Thread PJ Eby
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > FWIW I'm totally fine with you bringing together that PEP - as you say > its complementary to what I'm focused on (I believe I even suggested > you might want to do that). Did you have any feedback on the proposal itself? I'm particularly

Re: [Web-SIG] Draft 2: WSGI Response Upgrade Bridging

2014-10-12 Thread Benoit Chesneau
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:10 PM, PJ Eby wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Graham Dumpleton > wrote: > > So PJE, please step back and do not go rushing out to create a PEP. That > is > > the worst thing you could do at this point and will only serve to deter > > people from the community