Right. Note that App Engine does not copy the full CGI mechanism -- it doesn't start a new process for each request. But it does use os.environ to set the request parameters for each request. However, in practice, all but the simplest test apps use a custom WSGI bridge, and we are considering dropping CGI in favor of WSGI in a future version of the App Engine runtime.
I can give the code of my lib that i use as bridge with my server on Py3k with wsgi that is small but replace very well the work of cgi in some functions and the community can start with that, and is simple to make it run. El , Hidura <hid...@gmail.com> escribió:
I used wsgi and have my app on a shared server and runs excelent,
better than if was using cgi, that cause me a lot of headache with the
incompatiblities with Py3k.
2011/1/4, Eric Larson e...@ionrock.org>:
> At Tue, 4 Jan 2011 17:19:48 +0000 (UTC),
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>
>> PJ Eby writes:
>> >
>> > At 12:43 PM 1/4/2011 +0000, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> > >Alice BevanMcGregor writes: > > [1]
>> > >http:://bit.ly/e7rtI6 So, while we are at it, could we get rid of
>> > >the "CGI server example" in this new SWGI spec? This is 2011, and we
>> > >should promote modern idioms, not encourage people to do 1995 Web
>> > >programming. 10 years ago, CGI was already frown upon. (and even the
>> > >idea that WSGI should provide some kind of CGI compatibility sounds
>> > >a bit ridiculous to me) Regards Antoine.
>> >
>> > I still use CGI for the odd one-off, testing, prototyping, etc., and
>> > it's by far the easiest thing to deploy on a lot of web hosts.
>>
>> Really? Isn't that the kind of thing for which wsgiref should be the
>> preferred
>> choice?
>> As for deployment, why would anyone recommend using CGI in production?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Antoine.
>>
>
> It is important to recognize that "production" doesn't necessarily
> have to be some ultra powerful server somewhere that is central to
> some organization. A simple server running Apache with CGI is just as
> valid a production environment as an EC2 cluster. This is especially
> true when you are the only person using the application and
> requirements are minimal. The point being that in terms of the
> specification, it should be plausible a person could use a WSGI
> application without heavy server requirements. Shared hosting is the
> obvious example here but minimal virtual machines may also fit into
> this category.
>
>
> Eric Larson
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/eric%40ionrock.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/hidura%40gmail.com
>
--
Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil
Diego I. Hidalgo D.
_______________________________________________ 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
