Re: [boost] [soc07][cgi] RFC: use-cases/scope

From: Martin Wille (mw8329_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-22 14:00:48

Darren Garvey wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> In preparation for working on a cgi library for the Summer of Code
> (proposal: cgi.sf.net/proposal.html), I'd like to collect a list of
> use-cases for such a library.
> 
> The purpose of this discussion isn't to decide what goes into the library
> (the scope will be limited to CGI, FastCGI and possibly SCGI backends) -
> although please don't let that censor your thoughts - but to ensure the
> library is structured in such a way to allow the widest potential for
> expansion.
> 
> Of particular interest are thoughts about:
> - CGI vs. HTTP: if the library worked with (for example) mod_proxy_http,
> would the 'limitation' of only providing CGI variables be an acceptable
> compromise for the sake of portability across protocols?

No problem here. However, I do not want my code be limited to a single
web server implementation, anyway; so mod_* isn't really something I
usually consider for a web applications.

> - how significant SCGI is (would anyone use it?);

Well, I use SCGI. However, if FastCGI and WSGI get supported then
there's probably nobody who would insist on getting SCGI supported.

> - non-CGI/FastCGI/SCGI/HTTP protocols that might be of interest;

WSGI.

Maybe, some people would like a tomcat-compatible connector.

> - low-level design decisions

It would be great if multiprocess and multithreading designs would be
supported, respectively.

It would also be great if not only basic HTTP authentication would get
supported.

Support for session management would be nice to have, but not essential.
If such support exists then it would be nice if it would support
cookieless session management.

Support for streaming could be interesting (not sure if that can
actually be done in the CGI world, though).

HTH,
m