[Web-SIG] WSGI server aimed at easy deployment and administration

Ian Bicking ianb at colorstudy.com
Wed Oct 6 02:47:42 CEST 2010

The scope is somewhat different, but the goals similar:

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Randall <berryman77 at gmail.com> wrote:

> The rise of WSGI and the many server implementations is really great.
> I've configured some combinations of webservers and WSGI servers that
> are very fast and reliable.  Now that there's a good standard for
> Python web applications to build on, there is an opportunity to create
> a standard for very easy deployment and administration.
> Consider the common scenario where an administrator is responsible for
> half a dozen or more applications, each for a different department
> within a company.  Instead of having each application configure its
> own settings for mail servers, database connections and the
> administrator needing to configure and install various CherrPy,
> Pylons, Turbogears, etc WSGI files and dependencies, it would be nice
> if each application, regardless of framework, could be deployed as a
> single file archive.  The SMTP and database settings could be
> configured once for all applications and even application specific
> configuration could be configured by the administrator using a single
> interface.  In addition, it would provide statistics about the
> applications and allow them to be restarted individually, again from a
> uniform interface.
> It would provide services that the applications could access through a
> standard interface.  Mail, database, temporary files, persistent
> storage location. etc.  It should work with any WSGI application, but
> an application could opt to take advantage of the services offered.
> An application server like this could do wonders for getting Python
> applications into the typical enterprise (I hate to that word, but
> it's very appropriate here).  And yes, if my description sounds like
> Tomcat, that's what I had in mind.  It would of course interface with
> a web server and probably have its own HTTP server, but you'd only
> have to go through that setup once instead of once per application.
> What it means in the end is that after this hypothetical application
> server is set up, a new application can be deployed by uploading a
> single file archive.  For a single application deployment, it's not so
> useful, but when deploying and managing multiple applications, it
> could be a godsend to administrators and as a result to developers
> that work with them.  And best of all, it could break down barriers to
> getting Python web applications into enterprise environments.
> I haven't come across any current efforts to develop something like
> this and I'm finishing something else at the moment. So I wrote this
> post to document my thoughts, see if there is any interest and
> possibly get a discussion going.
> -Randall
> _______________________________________________
> 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/ianb%40colorstudy.com

Ian Bicking  |  http://blog.ianbicking.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/attachments/20101005/bf8dfc36/attachment.html>

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list