[Web-SIG] WSGI and start_response
graham.dumpleton at gmail.com
Tue Apr 13 14:46:19 CEST 2010
On 13 April 2010 22:12, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan at ochtman.nl> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 14:01, Graham Dumpleton
> <graham.dumpleton at gmail.com> wrote:
>> They are not simplications. They are clarifications or just describing
>> existing practice. They are not necessarily mod_wsgi specific.
> Sorry, I didn't mean to imply they were mod_wsgi specific, and they
> definitely look sane/like an improvement to me.
> Okay, so, would it be valuable to have both 1.1 and 2.0? I.e. if we
> start writing a new spec now, should we aim for just a 2.0 that copes
> with everything at once, or first work on an 1.1 that has
> clarifications/improvements and is otherwise relatively compatible
> with 1.0 (but also with python 3.x)?
> Who's up for some PEP-writing?
The last attempt was to have WSGI 1.1 as clarifications and Python 3.X.
And when I say 'last attempt', yes there have been people who have
stepped up to try and get this to happen in the past. I think you
would be the 3rd time, excluding me in general having tried to push it
in the past and also given up.
You really should perhaps look back through the archive of WEB-SIG
posts on Google Groups to understand the history and how this always
seems to just go around in circles. :-)
More information about the Web-SIG