[Web-SIG] WSGI for HTTP/2.0 ?

[Cory Benfield]

On 20 September 2014 08:23, Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
> I will happily discuss stuff with you off-list, but I'm not
> particularly interested in having the primary effort be cabal style -
> HTTP/2 has managed to go through a much harder rev with very strong
> personalities and much the same sort of death possible as you're
> concerned about here with great transparency.

That's true...but it has been extremely painful for all concerned.
There is minimal appetite left in the WG to continue with the work,
and a number of people quite want to put a pin in things to just give
themselves a break. I suspect this is what Graham is worried about,
and as I recall he is speaking from bitter experience.

> I don' t think thats incompatible with your needs though - for
> instance, if you want to stay offlist and debate privately to avoid
> 1000-cut-pain : thats fine, but I reserve the right to summarise and
> discuss things here (and equally to ignore kibbitzing here that isn't
> being productive).

I'd like to propose instead something of a third way, inspired by the
HTTPBis. A small cabal, off-list, come up with an initial proposal
that is essentially complete (a la SPDY). That proposal should ideally
have running code behind it so that it can be played with (also like
SPDY).

That proposal is then brought to the list for further refinement. This
allows Graham to input early, and ensures open review of the proposal
while those who don't want to participate in the fully-open forum can
absent themselves from the discussion.

Of course, I'd like to help regardless of the actual procedure we use.

Cory