[Web-SIG] Regarding the WSGI draft

Ian Bicking ianb at colorstudy.com
Fri Aug 27 18:27:53 CEST 2004

Paul Boddie wrote:
> I think it depends how many frameworks you want to support and which 
> ones you choose. The work may be intellectually straightforward, but
> it isn't necessarily trivial. As for the value of the WSGI concept,
> if it provides a better foundation for higher-level frameworks and
> applications, then it's obviously a good thing. I'm not totally
> convinced that lots of people might want to run Webware on top of
> Twisted, for example, and that the Twisted people will get excited by
> this very notion and do the work to make it happen. (Although having
> now said that, they might rise to the challenge.) Moreover, when it
> comes to "co-locating" applications, there exists some pretty
> adequate solutions for doing so right now through Apache and other 
> generic Web server solutions.

This is open source -- the Twisted people don't have to be very excited 
about Webware in order for Webware to run on Twisted.  *Someone* has to 
be excited about it, that's all.

But WSGI takes it one further -- instead of the NxM problem which you 
are addressing with WebStack (well, Nx1 in that case, but NxM if you 
started nesting arbitrary frameworks), simply by making Webware run on 
WSGI, and making Twisted into a WSGI server, they could be used 
together.  So I think there's more reason to be optimistic about the 

Ian Bicking  /  ianb at colorstudy.com  /  http://blog.ianbicking.org

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list