On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Kamil Gałuszka wrote:
> Hi !
>
> I wanted to post this in old topic from 2010 but Google always gives me an
> error on posting so I can't do that there. (soory for that!)
>
> I know that mod_python support was dropped long time ago but I t
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Ramiro Morales wrote:
> Now that specs like WSGI exist there is no point in going back one decade
> implementing interfaces to cater for one particular web server integration
> implementation.
Is that any worse than where we are now, using an interface that only
a
integration
implementation.
Ramiro Morales
@ramiromorales
On Nov 25, 2013 1:36 PM, "Kamil Gałuszka" wrote:
> Hi !
>
> I wanted to post this in old topic from 2010 but Google always gives me an
> error on posting so I can't do that there. (soory for that!)
>
> I know th
I understand that and I agree that it maybe doesn't have any uptake. But,
my reason for sending that information was question from today on
django-users about mod_python support on Django.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/django-users/449r3gUsN54
Cheers,
Kamil Gałuszka
2013/11/25
nted to post this in old topic from 2010 but Google always gives me an
> error on posting so I can't do that there. (soory for that!)
>
> I know that mod_python support was dropped long time ago but I think this
> information should be noted to core developers. There is new release
Hi !
I wanted to post this in old topic from 2010 but Google always gives me an
error on posting so I can't do that there. (soory for that!)
I know that mod_python support was dropped long time ago but I think this
information should be noted to core developers. There is new relea
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Gert Van Gool wrote:
> So in theory, if you change the mod_python handler to one of the projects
> mentioned (like paste.modwsgi).
> mod_python is "promoted" to the same status as FastCGI?
I'm not sure I understand your question.
I suppose the approach of using p
ould make my patches and
> django.core.handlers
> >> simpler... As well as make it possible to use WSGI middleware with
> Django
> >> under mod_python.
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >> To sum up, I'm proposing two things:
> >> 1.- Mak
andlers
>> simpler... As well as make it possible to use WSGI middleware with Django
>> under mod_python.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> To sum up, I'm proposing two things:
>> 1.- Making the WSGI handler the only handler.
>> 2.- If we want to keep mod_pyth
ddleware with Django
> under mod_python.
>
> ...
>
> To sum up, I'm proposing two things:
> 1.- Making the WSGI handler the only handler.
> 2.- If we want to keep mod_python support, use a mod_python<->WSGI wrapper.
>
What about FastCGI?
Cheers
Tom
--
You receive
Hello,
On 23 June, 01:00, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
> > To sum up, I'm proposing two things:
> > 1.- Making the WSGI handler the only handler.
> > 2.- If we want to keep mod_python support, use a mod_python<
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
> To sum up, I'm proposing two things:
> 1.- Making the WSGI handler the only handler.
> 2.- If we want to keep mod_python support, use a mod_python<->WSGI wrapper.
>
> What do you think?
As noted in a separate
Nice timing :)
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
>
> I'm going to work on some patches to improve WSGI support, and I found
> something that, if changed, could make my patches and django.core.handlers
> simpler... As well as make it possible to use WSGI middleware with Django
eep support for mod_python with the two
advantages above:
1.- Adapting the existing code the mod_python handler and also applying the
changes I proposed in the patch for ticket #8927.
2.- Copying the following module (Public Domain) into Django:
http://www.aminus.net/browser/modpython_gateway.py
3.
14 matches
Mail list logo
