[Web-SIG] WSGI in standard library

Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Wed Feb 15 00:40:51 CET 2006

At 11:20 PM 2/14/2006 +0000, Alan Kennedy wrote:
>Phillip: Hope you don't mind me taking the liberty of rearranging your code?

You can do whatever you want with it; just don't expect me to maintain your 
rearranged version.  :)

Among other issues, I've got a pending patch from Guido regarding date 
formatting for the server.  Note that Guido has proposed to include wsgiref 
in the stdlib, which makes the issue of having separate imports for the 
handler code and such moot, so there would be no need in that case to 
reorganize the code.

A lot of people seem to have missed the part where Guido's original and 
ongoing proposal is to add wsgiref to the stdlib.  The present discussion 
about what WSGI server (if any) should be in the stdlib is really a 
question of whether there should be another server *in addition* to the one 
in wsgiref -- unless you want to try to argue that neither wsgiref.handlers 
nor wsgiref.simple_server should be included, in which case Guido's simple 
proposal devolves into the chaos of redesigning the wsgiref library by 
committee.  (Although I suppose it already has become that.)

The reasoning for having wsgiref in the stdlib isn't so people can have a 
server, it's to have a reference implementation of WSGI functionality and 
some standards-compliant utilities for working with the data structures 
(request/response manipulation).  There would possibly be value in adding 
other similar utilities, middleware (e.g. paste.lint), etc.

But any proposal for adding a WSGI server that was for the purpose of 
*having* a server, would be independent of that, and indeed independent of 
wsgiref AFAICT.

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list