[Web-SIG] Standardised configuration.

[Paul Boddie]

David Warnock wrote:
> 
> But I for 1 can certainly imagine an "application" consisting of
multiple
> servers, so that parts of the "application/site" are webware, part
> twisted, part quixote. If all these supported wsgi and if there were a
> wsgi session add-on then surely this heads towards the possible, and
that
> makes lots of things much easier to assemble/develop/extend.

Yes, once you've discarded the Webware session mechanisms (or most
likely
swapped them out within Webware itself), and once you've done the same
with
Quixote and Twisted (or quite probably added sessions to Twisted unless
it
comes with session support these days), you could have a session manager
of
some kind under the applications. It might even have to happen under the
frameworks, since I suppose you would need to define how best to make
these
servers co-exist and then add this session manager so that all server
environments are affected in the same way.

What I've done so far with certain WebStack examples is to provide a
resource which deals with authentication and then to add the actual
application functionality as a resource within that resource. I imagine
that
the chaining of WSGI components would be done in a similar fashion,
although
WebStack doesn't address the issue of dispatching through different
server
environments, whereas your example situation would have to tackle that
issue.

Paul