WSGI-server in the standard distro?

[Robert Brewer]

> Having a HTTP 1.0/1.1-compliant production-grade
> WSGI-only server in the distro would be sweet :-)
> 
> I might be demanding a bit much here, but still ...

To "demand" it might be a bit much, but to "expect" it...? ;) I don't
think anyone's going to drop what they're doing and go code such a
server because it's been demanded; even if they did, it would need a
long-ish period of time in which it was tested by the community in
production scenarios. However, since our hypothetical server is not yet
in the standard library, who would use it in production? Catch-22.

An alternative would be to allow one or more of the servers which have
been written for CherryPy or Django to see some use "in the wild", and
have each go through its own series of bugfixes and performance
improvements, driven by direct need. When they have done so, we can
compare them and drop one into the standard library with far fewer
unknowns.

I'm obviously biased (being on the CherryPy team), but I think the
"winner" will be Peter Hunt's WSGI server for CherryPy. It was designed
from the beginning to be framework-agnostic; that is, there's nothing
CherryPy-specific in the module. Peter has said multiple times that he'd
like it to become the standard WSGI server, and that his desire is for
other frameworks to adopt it wholesale. Django should certainly grab it
right away; performance-wise, it beats the pants off the reference
server that comes with wsgiref (which is what they based their WSGI
server on). If there are any licensing or other issues keeping django
from using the CherryPy WSGI server, swing by
irc://irc.oftc.net/cherrypy and we'll get them worked out in a hurry.


Robert Brewer
System Architect
Amor Ministries
fumanchu at amor.org