[Web-SIG] using WSGI for standard pluggable applications

[Ian Bicking]

Shannon -jj Behrens wrote:
>>Hopefully that actually makes sense. But in short, some template languages
>>lose a lot of power without the ability to do this kind of hooking into
>>functions up the inheritance chain. This is why webapp ignorant output
>>filters running over the output won't work for those webapps.
>>
>>Maybe people distributing such a webapp should do something to indicate that
>>skinning should occur "inside" the app vs having something applied
>>"outside"?
> 
> 
> I completely agree.  Is this a real problem that a lot of people face
> or is it of academic interest only?  

Yes, it is a real problem!  I face it every day, it seems.  It is the 
nature of life in a heterogeneous shop.  Of course, that also includes 
non-Python apps, which rules out a bunch of possible solutions for me.

> It seems to me that sticking to a
> framework for your own code is a very helpful thing.  If you must
> support 2 frameworks, recode the common look and feel as you
> transition from one framework to the newer framework.  I think trying
> to always be completely framework neutral is like trying to use C with
> no pointers :-D

If I don't want to fall into complete NIH syndrome, I must face the fact 
that I don't have one framework.

Obviously not everything can be framework neutral, but it's really just 
a desire to keep the number of hacks to a minimum.

> I have to deal with upwards of 10 apps across many departments that
> all use my shared look and feel.  The way the different apps use
> inheritance hooks to subtly change various parts of the page is
> intricate.  I'd hate to have to do that using a filter :-/  Oh well,
> YMMV.

-- 
Ian Bicking  /  ianb at colorstudy.com  /  http://blog.ianbicking.org