Open Stack

On 04/23/2013 11:02 AM, Kurt Griffiths wrote:
>> Why don't we get this into Oslo and at least make an attempt at driving
> the car in the same direction?
> 
> I'm not sure that putting either into Oslo is the right solution, but
> add-ons/hooks that seem to be pretty common would be OK.

Did you read my initial email? I was saying we should write a simple
wrapper in Oslo around Falcon instead of using eleventy different
underlying WSGI frameworks and just standardize on using one -- Falcon.

>> However, the existing WSGI code in our projects isn't going away any
>> time soon and continues to evolve. I think there'd be huge value in
>> someone incrementally consolidating those WSGI implementations, bit by
>> bit.
> 
> As I mentioned at the summit, we ended up doing Falcon because Pecan and
> Flask were too slow for a chatty data API. That being said, Pecan does
> some nice things for you, and is probably fast enough for management APIs.
> If we could standardize on a couple frameworks, that may be Good Enough.

Did you investigate contributing fixes and enhancements to Flask or
Pecan before creating Falcon?

-jay