[Python-Dev] WSGI is now Python 3-friendly

["Martin v. Löwis"]

>> I think people read this as "nothing would be changed, period."
> 
>> However, you did make substantial changes to the specification (or else
>> the whole exercise would have been pointless, I suppose, and you
>> couldn't have claimed that WSGI is now Python 3-friendly when it
>> previously was not).
> 
> The clarifications remove Python3-only ambiguities, making it possible
> for to implement both sides the spec sanely and consistently under Python 3.

Sure. I don't argue whether this is an improvement.

I claim that it is a specification change, long after the specification
has been implemented multiple times. It thus deserves to get a new
name (i.e. PEP number).

PJE says that strictly speaking, the PEP had not been accepted yet.
However, at this stage, claiming that it is still open for edits
is really confusing, IMO.

>> So this is essentially a new version of the spec. As PEPs themselves
>> are not versioned (unlike, say, ISO standards), Guido insists it ought
>> to get a new PEP number. Then, people declaring compliance can identify
>> what specification they actually comply to. Declaring compliance to
>> PEP 333 as-of-last-week-but-not-as-of-today is now difficult. This
>> particularly puzzles people some of the existing WSGI servers are
>> now incompatible to the PEP, when they still were compatible last
>> week.
> 
> PJE's claim is that there are *no* such servers:

Does that claim include wsgiref?

> I hadn't realized that PEP 333 was never actually in the 'Final' status
> (de facto, it has been so for years, of course).  Given that fact, and
> PJEs assurances, I think amending the PEP and then immediately declaring
> it final is reasonable.

I'm still with Guido here: I'd accept PEP 333 as final in the state it
had last week, give PJE's edits a new PEP number, and accept that as
final right away also.

Regards,
Martin