Jim, Thanks for the reply.
> 2. Do we want to reuse its configuration syntax. -1 > The configuration format used by Paste Deploy is a simple > standard format used by many many systems inside and outside > the Python community. I'm not objecting to the general ini-style format (do I read you right?), but rather to the overloaded section names, the URI/name syntax, the 'set' prefix, composite applications, etc. Paste Deploy layers a whole mini-language on top of the ini format. > Obviously, we can agree to disagree on this. Sure, as long as Paste Deploy's config syntax is optional for whatever-we're-building. :^) > 1. Can we agree on a standard set of entry points so that WSGI > applications can be combined automatically? I think Paste > Deploy provides at least good start on this. > > You haven't commented on the entry points defined by Paste > Deploy. Do you have an opinion on adopting the entry-point API > defined by Paste Deploy? Ok, I need help: defining an entry point allows a plugin to advertise that it can satisfy that entry point, but you still need a configuration layer to actually wire it up, no? In which case: 1) What does "automatically" mean? 2) Aren't we back to discussing config syntax? chad _______________________________________________ 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
