From the linked page:<p><pre><code> Why ? There are already mod_wsgi, flup and lot of protocols (fastcgi, scgi...).
Is this faster or simpler to configure ?
Stop acting as a Rails user ! Deploy of python web applications is not a problem.
No need of ultra-hypeous next-fu*king-useless almost-working deploy technology.
The challenge in the python-world is now "features", uWSGI is a feature rich
application, developer (and administrator/security paranoid/business environments)
friendly. Stop.
Other deploy systems, works very well, this one does only more things.</code></pre>
Much needed. We pythonistas are still waiting for a deployment option as slick as ruby passenger.<p>I'd prefer to see this wrapped up as an nginx-module and seems they have that on their todo-list - awesome!
Looks interesting. I like that at least one real ISP is using it... it gives me hope that one day it will spread to be a good solution for python apps on cheap web hosts.<p>Also it is good to have a couple of different python extensions for apache. It keeps them all on their toes.<p>I'm not sure the GPL licence makes sense for this project though. It means that to use it, people have to use the GPL for their web apps... or pay/negotiate a different licence. Well, maybe getting people to pay for it is their intention.<p>The protocol uses a 16bit length headers... meaning it will fail for big payloads. That turned me off investigating it out any further. However it is likely not a problem.