[Web-SIG] Declaring PEP 3333 accepted (was: PEP 444 != WSGI 2.0)

[Randy Syring]

In the server/gateway example, there is a comment in the code that says:

# TODO: this needs to be binary on Py3

The "TODO" part confuses me.  In other areas of the PEP, there are 
comments like:

# call must be byte-safe on Py3

which make sense.  But is the TODO meant to be a TODO for the PEP or is 
it meant to be a note to the person running the example on Py3.  If the 
latter, maybe "TODO" isn't the best prefix.

FWIW, don't consider this an objection, it is just a question I had as I 
read through the PEP.

--------------------------------------
Randy Syring
Intelicom
Direct: 502-276-0459
Office: 502-212-9913

For the wages of sin is death, but the
free gift of God is eternal life in
Christ Jesus our Lord (Rom 6:23)


On 01/03/2011 07:43 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss<jacob at jacobian.org>  wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Guido van Rossum<guido at python.org>  wrote:
>>> Although [PEP 3333] is still marked as draft, I personally think of it
>>> as accepted; [...]
>> What does it take to get PEP 3333 formally marked as accepted? Is
>> there anything I can do to push that process forward?
>>
>> The lack of a WSGI answer on Py3 is the main thing that's keeping me,
>> personally, from feeling excited about the platform. Once that's done
>> I can feel comfortable coding to it -- and browbeating those who don't
>> support it.
>>
>> I understand that PEP 444/Web3/WSGI 2/whatever might be a better
>> answer, but it's clearly got some way to go. In the meantime, what's
>> next to get PEP 3333 officially endorsed and accepted?
> I haven't heard anyone speak up against it, ever, since it was
> submitted. If no-one speaks up in the next 24 hours consider it
> accepted (and after that delay, anyone with SVN privileges can mark it
> thus).
>