Anyway, I'm okay the discussion has died down a bit -- I'll keep working on paste.deploy and see how that works out, and revisit this later. Right now I'm more interested in how this effects the rest of the "system".
One issue I've come upon is how to make applications and frameworks both encapsulated and transparent. Specifically if I have an application which uses a framework, and the framework uses several pieces of middleware, I need both *some* of the framework configuration to be exposed, and some application configuration parameters to be exposed. This can continue further when one logical application is composed of subapplications. For instance, imagine I have an admin interface built on Subway, with a web frontend in Wareweb, and a WebDAV interface from PyFileServer. The three applications/frameworks can create a single logical application. But how do I present a unified face for the application? With global and flat configuration, the default is nearly complete transparency, with some potential for collision. Without global configuration the default is an opaque system, with no possibility of collision. In a practical sense the global configuration is easier to get working, and more adaptable for the system administrator. Anyway, that's the issue I'm thinking about now. In paste.deploy it's kind of handled by: [app:someapp] set master_setting = foo ... include subapp somehow ... [app:subapp] get some_local_setting = master_setting -- Ian Bicking / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://blog.ianbicking.org _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
