[Web-SIG] Re: Web-SIG Digest, Vol 10, Issue 26

[Jim Dabell]

[Please trim responses in future, you didn't have to quote the whole digest to 
us.]

> We should implement a Servlet-like interface which works atop WSGI,

Fair enough, but as it would sit on top WSGI, nobody need concern themselves 
with it until WSGI is finished.  Otherwise you are trying to hit a moving 
target.

The point of WSGI isn't that development stops after it's finished, but rather 
that everyone is on the same page before attempting something more ambitious 
like you describe.  Larger projects take more time to mature and give more 
scope for fundamental disgreements.  Something like WSGI can be specified, 
implemented and standardised relatively quickly, meaning there are 
incremental, measurable improvements, rather than everybody waiting around 
for the perfect system to be born.

Obviously your proposed servlet-like interface's requirements are a factor in 
what should go into WSGI, but I see no reason to believe your servlet-like 
interface would have significantly different requirements to all the other 
frameworks.


-- 
Jim Dabell