[Web-SIG] serving (potentially large) files through wsgi?

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 10:10 PM 12/18/2007 +0100, Manlio Perillo wrote:
>Ok.
>Here I would just say that when someone install something on its 
>system, it should at least know what he is doing.

And I repeat: you're welcome to your opinions about what's good or 
bad, but that has nothing to do with WSGI's design rationale, which 
is based on *different* goals.

It is in fact a design goal of WSGI that someone who does NOT "know 
what they are doing" should be able to install Python web 
applications.  After all, it is certainly possible for PHP 
applications -- often in *spite* of PHP's ridiculously global and 
mutually incompatible configuration options


>And about an option for range control, it is true that it will 
>"force" an user to make a choice, but this is not a good reason for 
>not adding the option at all.

In the context of WSGI's design goals, it's an excellent reason.  If 
you have different design goals, you may disagree -- but at that 
point, you're no longer talking about WSGI.


>This is about server flexibility:

Which, as I've already explained, is an *anti*-feature relative to 
WSGI's design goals.

Simply restating your opinion over and over won't change that.  You 
are free to have different design goals, and even to argue that 
WSGI's goals are misguided.

However, it is pointless to argue that these are *not* WSGI's goals 
(since I defined them), or to imply that such "flexibility" 
*supports* WSGI's goals (since it does not).