[Web-SIG] WSGI for Python 3

[Graham Dumpleton]

On Tuesday, July 20, 2010, Etienne Robillard <erob at gthcfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>     AFAICT, the main difference is that under a
> bytes-only regime, the changes should be more consistent/mechanical, i.e.,
> able to be performed by relatively superficial code inspection.
>
>
>
> The problem in all these discussions is that practically no one has
> been prepared to actually sit down and attempt to migrate any
> significant code over to any of these proposals and Python 3.0.
>
> The only notable attempt is the work Robert Brewer did with CherryPy.
> Ultimately though I don't think the CherryPy case tells us much as it
> simple translates the interface in to an internal way of doing things.
> The true litmus test will be the conversion of any framework which
> keeps the WSGI interface exposed, with it being used as a means of
> composing together components to make a stack.
>
> Until someone has done that we have absolutely no evidence one way or
> the other as to what proposal is easier or even viable given potential
> short comings, or otherwise, in the Python language and standard
> libraries.
>
> It is a chicken and egg problem though in that I would say practically
> everyone doesn't want to do anything until the WSGI specification has
> been updated as they don't want to waste their time. You cant though
> update the specification without truly knowing whether a particular
> approach will work and to do that you have no choice but to actually
> try it.
>
>
> Hi Graham et al,
>
> One could maybe write a migration app for porting
> WSGI 1 apps to WSGI 2, in the same way 2to3.py was written.
>
> That's how at least I hoped to migrate notmm to Python 3. A switch
> could be used
> also to enable/disable bytes or text-mode only for HTTP headers
> parsing...
>
> Is there no such tools yet ready to slowly start moving ahead with
> WSGI 2 ? I recognize it's a chicken and egg problem but I don't think
> its necessary for framework authors to migrate to Python 3 in an
> attempt to solve mistery encoding
> errors affecting Windows platforms...

The issues are not Windows specific. You are misunderstanding past
comments if you believe that.

The purpose to actually trying it is to work out how viable bytes
everywhere and/or users dealing with % encoding is. If dealing with
bytes everywhere proves to be easy then great, going that way may be
best idea. If it is a PITA as some have said dealing with bytes is in
Python 3.0 then we will know rather than it being speculation at this
point.

Graham

> A  easy-to-follow roadmap to WSGI
> 2  and writing
> related development tools should be a more effective way to port
> frameworks (to WSGI 2) and stick with Python 2 if they want so! ;-)
>
> my 2 cents,
>
> E
> --
> Etienne Robillard
> Green Tea Hackers Club
>
> E-mail:     erob at gthcfoundation.org
> Work phone: 1 (514) 962-7703
> Website:    https://gthc.org/
>
> During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. -- George Orwell
>
>
>
>