On Oct 14, 3:46 am, Michele Simionato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think we do agree entirely, it is just that the application we have > in > mind is more a collection of web services than a traditional Web > application. > Now, since you are here, there is an unrelated question that I want to > ask you, concerning the future of Paste with respect to WSGI 2.0. > I do realize that at this stage WSGI 2.0, is only a draft, still I > would > like to know: > > 1. if you think that WSGI 2.0 is good idea (I expect you will say > "yes")
Yeah. WebOb's functions have made me feel less of a need for that change, and it normalizes some of the parts of WSGI that WSGI 2 removes. But I think it would generally help. > 2. if you plan to support it in Paste and if yes when (I mean, in a > month, > in a year, in three years?) > 3. if you already have thought of a migration plan and, in that case, > what your strategy would likely be. This I'm really not sure about. A middleware could wrap any WSGI application to make it support both WSGI 1 and 2. However, on the server side it's unclear how to do the transition (including middleware that calls WSGI applications). If WSGI 2 included some marker that I could look for, then it would be relatively easy too -- I'd always just call applications with a library function that knew how to deal with both kinds of applications. Without that... well, maybe I'll just have to be sure that there's a clear upgrade path for the spec in general. Of course, as Graham says, WSGI 2 is just talk at this point; there's not a ton of momentum toward actually delivering a new spec. Ian -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
