<i>But the WSGI Lite protocol is actually backwards compatible with WSGI. You can write code to the WSGI Lite API, and transparently interoperate with existing WSGI servers, apps, and middleware.</i><p>Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this mean that it's WSGI <i>extra</i> rather than WSGI <i>lite</i>? I mean, you don't generally consider the lite version of something to have the all the features of the full version and then some.
is it just me or is this completely flawed as a response to armin's article?<p>- Armin: "you can't replace the 'bad' bits of WSGI for asynchronous apps without using some python extension like greenlet"<p>- to which this article replies: "Armin is wrong, i've replaced WSGI! PS<i>: if you're an asynchronous server you have to use greenlet!"<p></i>see 'known limitations'<p>basically, in trying to challenge armin he's proved him right. and he does this without a hint of irony?!
This actually seems like a reasonable approach to me. WSGI isn't really friendly to application developers (because it's not the API they expect when they naively approach the problem) so mostly it's been wrapped by the various frameworks. Armin's article seemed to be saying "Stop bitching that you can't use WSGI because it's more complex than you think. Here's why. Just pick a framework."<p>This approach seems to take care of the 90% problem while leaving the full power of WSGI exposed if you want/need it. It's like a minimalist web framework to do just the smoothing over of the WSGI API and nothing else.<p>The backwards compatability is key: It can be adopted by application developers, and doesn't depend on server developers.<p>It may not have sprung into existence in a perfect form but I think it is definitely worth exploring this approach.
Some related blog posts:<p>* <i>Let's talk about WSGI</i> - <a href="http://www.b-list.org/weblog/2009/aug/10/wsgi/" rel="nofollow">http://www.b-list.org/weblog/2009/aug/10/wsgi/</a><p>* <i>Snakes on the web</i> - <a href="http://jacobian.org/writing/snakes-on-the-web/" rel="nofollow">http://jacobian.org/writing/snakes-on-the-web/</a>
Ok, I'm using WSGI every day but I haven't delved down into the details of it. But what would be the benefits of using WSGI Lite instead of the regular WSGI? Performance?
I always thought of WSGI as a bridge between the web server and whatever web framework you happen to use, but this and the referenced article talk a lot about interaction between different frameworks and applications.<p>I don't really understand what is meant by this. Does this mean they want Django to interact with, say, Bottle?