Hi! On Thursday March 12, 2009 12:29:29 Jorge Vargas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 6:59 AM, Gustavo Narea <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hola, Jorge. > > I'm moving this into it's own thread. > > >> 2- routes? why will you have to drop down to routes from TG for auth? > > > > In that case, well, I've repeated this possibly a thousand times: It's a > > serious bug that TG2's object dispatch mechanism (or the Rest controller) > > isn't wsgiorg_args compliant. > > I'm sorry to sound clueless but you are the first person I see talking > about this. (tg2 not following it, I remember reading about it some > time go)
Check the mailing lists and the logs for #turbogears, I'd already mentioned this. > After reading http://www.wsgi.org/wsgi/Specifications/routing_args I > see this is a simple convenience and I see no real value in forcing > people into it. If you manipulate the named and positional arguments in URLs (like TG's object dispatch stuff), then you should comply with it. > Could you explain why TG2 isn't compliant? and why is it a "serious > bug" ? Because it manipulates the named and positional arguments, but doesn't define them in the relevant variable in the environ. > More importantly why should we support it according to > http://www.wsgi.org/wsgi/Specifications these are all "suggestions" > not things you must do or your software will not work with wsgi. If you want interoperability, then you should follow standards. So this time, if you want the parameters extracted from TG2's object dispatch stuff to be usable in TG-independent stuff, then they must be made available in a TG- independent way -- and there's already an standard for that. > Remember wsgi != wsgi.org I know. > And probably the most important question is why we don't have a ticket > for it > http://trac.turbogears.org/search?q=wsgiorg_args&wiki=on&changeset=on&ticke >t=on I forgot about it; IIRC, Florent said some time ago that he'll try to implement it, then I forgot. > > If you want to use named arguments, then your routing software *must* > > provide it (and TG2's object dispatch stuff is the default routing > > software). > > this is incorrect TG2 object dispatch stuff isn't really a "routing > software" it's a configuration of routes. No, it *is* a pretty basic routing software. > So what you are saying here > is that routes isn't wsgiorg_args compliant. No. Both Selector and Routes are wsgiorg_args compliant. > > repoze.what doesn't care, at all, if you use Routes, Selector or TG2's > > dispatch mechanism; the only thing it cares about is that such a software > > must be wsgiorg_args compliant. > > right? since when was this? are you saying that repoze.what changed > this without change inside TG2 or that TG2 was never aware of this and > even though repoze.what was build for TG2 (or the original package > some time ago) they where never compliant? That's an optional functionality which you'll be able to use as long as your routing software defines the variable required by the wsgiorg_args standard. So, if the only routing software you use is TG2's object dispatch stuff and it doesn't comply with the standard, then you have to use an alternate routing software which does comply with the standard. -- Gustavo Narea <xri://=Gustavo>. | Tech blog: =Gustavo/(+blog)/tech ~ About me: =Gustavo/about | --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
