Open Stack

Is there an estimate of how much work/time it would take to refactor the
library to slowly satisfy those three points?
Also, do we already have clear ideas on where we want to get? While the
three points are clear from a general point of view, what does each of
those points really mean? Which parts have you identified as "not easy to
understand", what architecture you have in mind when speaking about "modern
Python-based web applications"? IIRC you suggested Pecan as a reference.

About point #2, I think it could be the "easiest" to fix, even thou not so
elegantly at first, but I only see one bug report currently open about it (
https://bugs.launchpad.net/wsme/+bug/1532704). The first step here would be
to check the most common return codes used in APIs and see if WSME supports
them or not... (*)

IMHO, if we are trying to fix it, the first step should be to have a clear
plan as to encourage volunteer contributions, even thou there are not many
of those.

That's my 2 cents!

Cheers,
Stéphane

(*) I remember that a change I did to correct an HTTP status code returned
from WSME had an impact in the OpenStack projects using it. So before
releasing a version with the correct status codes we have to remember to
tell others to check their code to ensure it works with the correct status
codes.


On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Chris Dent <cdent+os at anticdent.org> wrote:

>
> Last summer Lucas Gomes and I were press ganged into becoming core on
> WSME. Since then we've piecemeal been verifying bug fixes and generally
> trying to keep things moving. However, from the beginning we both agreed
> that WSME is _not_ a web framework that we should be encouraging. Though
> it looks like it started with very good intentions, it never really
> reached a state where any of the following are true:
>
> * The WSME code is easy to understand and maintain.
> * WSME provides correct handling of HTTP (notably response status
>   and headers).
> * WSME has an architecture that is suitable for creating modern
>   Python-based web applications.
>
> Last summer we naively suggested that projects that are using it move to
> using something else. That suggestion did not take into account the
> realities of OpenStack.
>
> So we need to come up with a new plan. Lucas and I can continue to
> merge bug fixes as people provide them (and we become aware of them) and
> we can continue to hassle Doug Hellman to make a release when one is
> necessary but this does little to address the three gaps above nor the
> continued use of the framework in existing projects.
>
> Ideas?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Chris Dent               (╯°□°)╯︵┻━┻            http://anticdent.org/
> freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
Stéphane
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160308/8748a983/attachment.html>