[Zope3-dev] Re: Need to get more involved in Web SIG (was Re: Fixing ZServer bugs?)

[Jim Fulton]

Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> Jim Fulton wrote:
> [snip]
> 
>> I'm not certain that we're actively supporting either server.
> 
> But *in practice* we're supporting the Twisted integration, as that's 
> the only one that people use now, right?

Wrong. Use != support.

 > We may not be actually capable
> or willing to offer such support, but since everybody uses it, we do 
> support it in practice.

Who do you think is supporting the Twisted server?
I'll tell you that when we released Zope 3.2, *I* had to
do major fixes on it.  I'm not willing to volunteer for that
going forward.

No, we don't. Does Zope 3.3 work with Python 2.4.4?

 > Now on to what we would *like* to do...

...

> I'm having second thoughts about the Twisted integration for a number of 
> reasons:
> 
> * Twisted people actively dislike eggs. They won't eggify Twisted any 
> time soon.

Yes, but I think they do use distutils source releases, so I think that
shouldn't be a problem.  Do their source releases not work with eggs?

> * Twisted async approach doesn't really match Zope's threaded approach.

That isn't necessarily a problem. ZServer is based on an async approach too.
The impression I have, however, maybe incorrect, is that the Twisted community
isn't very interested in supporting applications not written according to the
Twisted Way.  I think that this makes their interest in WSGI, which allows someone
to use Twisted without using the twisted APIs, marginal at best.  I hope
I'm not being unfair and that if I'm wrong, that one of the lurkers here from
the Twisted community will correct me.

> and your reason:
> 
> * Who is maintaining Twisted's WSGI integration?  If that's us, then that
> sucks.

AFAIK, it is us.  I don't know if Twisted has updated their WSGI support.

We had to add input buffering to it and, I think made some other tweaks and fixes.
I'm not sure what the current status is.

>> I'm not sure anyone in the Zope Community has the appetite for performing
>> server maintenance.  That is why I was so anxious to move to WSGI.
>> Unfortunately, I don't think anyone has gotten very involved with WSGI.
> 
> I've only played with it. It's pretty neat:
> 
> http://faassen.n--tree.net/blog/view/weblog/2006/11/29/0
> 
> The WSGI stuff is getting *lots* of traction within the Python community 
> right now.

Yes, which is why I want to leverage it.

Jim

-- 
Jim Fulton           mailto:jim at zope.com       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org