Graham Dumpleton wrote: > The other question is whether there is even a demand for this. Do > people want to be able to take unmodified Python CGI scripts and try > to run them persistently in this way, or would they be better off > converting them to proper WSGI applications.
I would personally be interested in such an adapter. While recently considering whether to re-write a standalone mod_python application as CGI or WSGI, I was scared off by this paragraph from PEP333: ------------------------------------- Note: although we refer to it as an "application" object, this should not be construed to mean that application developers will use WSGI as a web programming API! It is assumed that application developers will continue to use existing, high-level framework services to develop their applications. WSGI is a tool for framework and server developers, and is not intended to directly support application developers. ------------------------------------- Do you have any thoughts about this warning? I'd much rather have the performance of mod_wsgi for my application, so if you can provide any mollifying views about WSGI's suitability for standalone applications my first choice would be to use WSGI directly. Regardless of its appropriateness for new applications, a CGI/WSGI adapter would still be useful for third-party CGI scripts that I have no interest in rewriting myself, as well as for the interim period during which my own CGI applications are being rewritten. It would be advantageous for the hosting company I work for, for example, to be able to boast that "your python CGI scripts run faster on our mod_wsgi-enabled servers." Thank you, Jeffrey -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
