From: Martin Wille (mw8329_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-23 02:23:36
Darren Garvey wrote:
> On 22/04/07, Martin Wille wrote:
> Noted. Incidentally, I figured WSGI wasn't a protocol per-se, but a
> framework for handling multiple protocols?
Hmm, you seem to be right. The text at
http://www.wsgi.org/wsgi/What_is_WSGI mislead me, as it somehow seems to
imply a protocol.
>> It would be great if multiprocess and multithreading designs would be
>> supported, respectively.
> Multithreading support will definitely be included, although I'm not sure
> about multiprocess (at least for the SoC timeline).
Well, then it's better to do what can be done within the timeline well
instead of failing the job in the attempt to add a boatload of features.
>> 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.
> I wonder how controversial this would be? I suppose it'd be quite simple to
> implement and easy to remove if it was a problem.
Which do you expect to be controversial: session management per se or
cookie-free session managment?
> Support for streaming could be interesting (not sure if that can
>> actually be done in the CGI world, though).
> By streaming do you just mean C++ streams, or some other fandanglery?
> Support for i/o streaming is vital, I think.
I was not talking about C++ streams. I was talking about sending a
stream over HTTP, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_streaming
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk