On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 10:09 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 29 September 2014 08:32, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
I think we're uncovering important assumptions / facts here.
It occurs to me that we're deep into one of Joey Hess's email-thread
anti-patterns, so I'm going to leave this here for now.
As I've said, I think the next step forward is to do some
experimentation, which I'm sure the existing implementors that have
expressed interest in this effort will join me
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
I think we're uncovering important assumptions / facts here.
Indeed!
For clarity: I'm not interested in a nice API for HTTP/2. I want
HTTP/2 and its full featureset to be *possible*, *efficient* and
*clear* in
On 29 September 2014 08:32, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
I think we're uncovering important assumptions / facts here.
Indeed!
For clarity: I'm not interested in a nice API for HTTP/2. I want
HTTP/2
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 2:55 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
Right now, anything providing the server profile has to cope with
exceptions and translate those to 500 errors, so we have the variation
of
I think we're uncovering important assumptions / facts here.
For clarity: I'm not interested in a nice API for HTTP/2. I want
HTTP/2 and its full featureset to be *possible*, *efficient* and
*clear* in a protocol that can replace WSGI - and do so with a fair
chance of adoption. Ditto websockets.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
So I propose we drop the write callable, and include a queue based
implementation in the adapter for PEP- code.
If you're dropping
On 27 September 2014 08:21, Benoit Chesneau bchesn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
...
So I propose we drop the write callable, and include a queue based
implementation in the adapter for PEP- code.
-Rob
What would
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
But perhaps it would be nicer to say:
iterator of headers_dict_or_body_bytes
With the first item yielded having to be headers (or error thrown),and
the last item yielded may be a dict to emit trailers.
So:
def
On 27 September 2014 10:31, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
But perhaps it would be nicer to say:
iterator of headers_dict_or_body_bytes
With the first item yielded having to be headers (or error thrown),and
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
One thing we could do with the status code in the headers dict is to
default to 200 - the vastly common case (in the same way that throwing
an error generates a 500). Then status wouldn't be required at all for
11 matches
Mail list logo
