On 5/2/06, Sylvain Hellegouarch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been following the discussion around adding wsgiref to the stdlib and > it sounds like a very good idea. However I'm a little concerned as it > seems only wsgiref has been suggested to be included. I wonder if you guys > intend to review other implementations before going ahead? I ask this > because the simple_server.py module of wsgiref says: > > """It has not been reviewed for security issues, > however, and we strongly recommend that you use a "real" web server for > production use. > """ > > Therefore, I wonder what is the final purpose of such addition? Is it > merely to have default WSGI implementation that *might* not be scalable in > production? > > I have nothing against wsgiref mind you. I'm fairly sure Phillip has done > a great job but I simply wanted to know if you would consider checking > other implemetations.
Anything that could be considered of sufficiently industrial strength to be secure and scalable in production would necessarily be such a large project, such a complex code base, and have such different release cycle that it would not make a good standard library candidate. (Think mod_python, Twisted, Zope, Apache; think tail wagging the doc.) -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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