[Web-SIG] Is PEP 3333 the final solution for WSGI on Python 3?

P.J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Sat Oct 23 18:43:32 CEST 2010

At 02:26 PM 10/23/2010 +0300, Armin Ronacher wrote:
>On 10/22/10 2:35 AM, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
>>has said:
>>    """Hopefully not. WSGI could do better and there is a proposal for
>>that (444)."""
>Just to give this some more context: I think WSGI (even in Python 2) 
>is faulty and we have the possibility now to fix it.  Nobody in the 
>web community is really eager to use Python 3 currently as far as I 
>can see, so we have some extra time where we can actually introduce 
>some value in to web development on Python 3.  An improved WSGI 
>specification could be a key to that.
>If PEP 3333 is what we end up with, that is fine with me as well.

I don't think it's an either-or case.  PEP 3333 just means that 
there's a clear path to port WSGI 1 apps.  If somebody wants to 
champion a WSGI 1.1, a 2.0, and whatever else, that's great!

I'm really trying to step *down* from involvement in this; the only 
reason I stepped up to do this now is because of the pending 3.2 
release and the open question(s) over stdlib APIs that have to 
stabilize in this release.

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list