Phillip J. Eby ha scritto: > At 07:33 PM 12/17/2007 +0100, Manlio Perillo wrote: > [...] > > And it's also irrelevant: WSGI applications are composable, which means > that not only does the application deployer not necessarily have any > idea what the application does, the *author* might not know every > detail, either (due to using other libraries, components, and middleware). >
Not sure. The configuration is part of the application. The deployer can ignore what the application does, but can not use a generic server configuration. As an example, for a WSGI gateway implementation embedded in a web server and with support for multiple sub interpreter, the deployer can't just configure the gateway so that an application is executed in a sub interpreter without first knowing if the application has problems with sub interpreters. > This is precisely why WSGI doesn't really have any "configuration" > defined, because the whole idea is that it should be as "plug-and-play" > as possible. Server-level configuration options are a liability to be > avoided, a sometimes-necessary evil. They aren't a feature. > Disagree. First of all, I like to have configuration in one place. The same for logging, since, as an example, a naive use of logging prevents logs rotation. Manlio Perillo _______________________________________________ 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
