> On 4 Jan 2016, at 14:48, Damjan Georgievski <gdam...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> **TL;DR: What do you believe WSGI 2.0 should and should not do? Should we do >> it at all?** > … >> - Support websockets >> - Support HTTP/2 > > What does HTTP/2 support mean? What features of HTTP/2 need to be > exposed in the wsgi api?
(CC-ing the list) The current WSGI API does not provide any consensus method for doing server push. Such a thing could absolutely be done as an extension to WSGI in its current form, and we should consider that. More generally, HTTP/2 is a bit more generous with what can be done with a stream than is the case in HTTP/1.1. For example, a stream could in principle be kept open indefinitely and used as a bi-directional communications channel: WSGI in its current form does not make that easy to do. Cory
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
