On 1/11/06, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I had not seen that, thanks for noting that. Added myself to CC as > well. As I look through the CherryPy code, maybe it would be possible > to figure this out with a sufficiently magical cherrypy.root object, > though I suspect some serious monkeypatching to cherrypy.config might > also be necessary (to make up for no complete and global set of > configuration), and I might just need to make cherrypy.root a > threadlocal object. That's probably the thing most likely to work.
I'm curious to know what the use cases are that actually don't work with the new CP implementation. cherrypy.request and cherrypy.response are threadlocal proxy objects already, if you feel that such an approach is required. That was what I had originally expected would be done in CP, but fumanchu decided to change the API a little bit with the tree mounting stuff (which is fine). > A positive part of a monkeypatch is that it will be immediately usable > with TG, probably/hopefully without TG needing to know that. Though I > suspect there may be some configuration issues... is TG still using > CherryPy's configuration, or is it starting to handle that on its own? TurboGears still uses CherryPy's configuration, but the files have changed to Python modules that return a nested dictionary. This can be transformed if need be. Kevin
