[Web-SIG] Are you going to convert Pylons code into Python 3000?

[Ian Bicking]

Graham Dumpleton wrote:
> Personally I believe that WSGI 1.0 should die along with Python 2.X. I
> believe that WSGI 2.0 should be developed to replace it and the
> introduction of Python 3.0 would be a great time to do that given that
> people are going to have to change their code anyway and that code
> isn't then likely to be backward compatible with Python 2.X.

I don't believe it should just *die*.  But I agree that this is a good 
time to revisit the specification.  Especially since I have no idea how 
the change to unicode text would effect the WSGI environment.  Having 
the environment hold bytes seems weird, but having it hold unicode is a 
substantial change.

I don't think it will be as bad as Martijn thinks, because the libraries 
people use will probably have relatively few interface changes.  Pylons 
and WebOb for instance should maintain largely the same interface (and 
they already expose unicode when possible).  None of the changes 
proposed for WSGI 2 would change this.

If I'm maintaining two versions of a library (one for Python 2, one for 
Python 3), then at least I'd like to get a little benefit out of it, and 
a revised WSGI would give some benefit.

I think we might still need some kind of WSGI 1.1 to clarify what WSGI 1 
(-like semantics) means in a Python 3.0 environment.  Creating adapters 
from WSGI 1 to WSGI 2 should be easy enough that we could still offer 
some support for minimally-translated WSGI code.

   Ian