[Web-SIG] WSGI in standard library

Bill Janssen janssen at parc.com
Mon Feb 20 05:39:16 CET 2006

Nice list, Alan.  I think you make a lot of sense here.


> [Alan Kennedy]
>  >>>Maybe we need a PEP
> [Bill Janssen]
>  >>Great idea!  That's exactly what I thought when I organized this SIG a
>  >>couple of years ago.
> [Guido van Rossum]
>  > At first I was going to respond "+1". But the fact that a couple of
>  > years haven't led to much suggests that it's unlikely to be fruitful;
>  > there just are too many diverging ideas on what is right. (Which makes
>  > sense since it's a huge and fast developing field.)
> Having considered the area for a couple of days, I think you're right: 
> the generic concept "web", as in web-sig, covers far too much ground, 
> and there are too many schools of thought.
>  > So unless someone (Alan Kennedy?) actually puts forward a PEP and gets
>  > it through a review of the major players on web-sig, I'm skeptical.
> But there is a subset which I think is achievable, namely http support, 
> which IMO is the subset that most needs a rework. And now that we have a 
> nice web standard, WSGI, it would be nice to make use of it to refactor 
> the current http support. The following are important omissions in the 
> current stdlib.
>   - Asynchronous http client/server support (use asyncore? twisted?)
>   - SSL support in threaded http servers
>   - Asynchronous SSL support
>   - Simple client file upload support
>   - HTTP header parsing support, e.g. language codes, quality lists, etc
>   - Simple object publishing framework?
> Addressing all of the above would be significant piece of work. And 
> IMHO, it is only achievable by staying focussed on http and NOT 
> addressing requirements such as
>   - Content processing, e.g. html tidy, html parsing, css parsing
>   - Foreign script language parsing or execution
>   - Page templating API
> I think it would be a good idea to address these concerns in separate PEPs.
> [Guido van Rossum]
>  > I certainly don't want this potential effort to keep us from adding
>  > the low-hanging fruit (wsgiref, with perhaps some tweaks as PJE can
>  > manage based on recent feedback here) to the 2.5 stdlib.
> Completely agreed. Any web-related PEPs are going to take a long time, 
> and are unlikely to be ready in time for 2.5.
> Regards,
> Alan.
> _______________________________________________
> Web-SIG mailing list
> Web-SIG at python.org
> Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/janssen%40parc.com

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list