[openstack-dev] [all] [api] Reminder: WSME is not being actively maintained

Jay Pipes jaypipes at gmail.com
Tue Mar 8 12:41:38 UTC 2016

Which projects in OpenStack actually use WSME at this time?


On 03/08/2016 07:10 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Mar 2016, Stéphane Bisinger wrote:
>> Is there an estimate of how much work/time it would take to refactor the
>> library to slowly satisfy those three points?
> No, that is the biggest reason I'm calling it unmaintained. Neither
> Lucas nor I have the time nor interest in being the people who fix WSME
> so no estimating has been done.
>> 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.
> I may have mentioned Pecan as a useful way to transition away from
> WSME because many people who are using WSME are actually using
> WSME+Pecan and its not that hard to extract the WSME parts and
> replace the input and output handling with voluptuous or something
> like that.
> However I don't like Pecan myself because it models URL routing using
> object-dispatch which I think is very bad for URL design. When we've
> talked about this before Flask and Falcon were mooted. Flask
> generally gets the nod because of its community but it requires a
> commitment to doing things the "Flask way".
>> 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 is pretty much the main question: Does OpenStack want to fix
> it?
>> That's my 2 cents!
> Thank you!
>> (*) 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.
> Exactly. Projects that use OpenStack have habituated themselves to
> some of the bad behaviors in WSME (I think at one point it was
> returning 404 when it should have been 405) and written tests to
> validate the bad behavior. Upgrading to a new WSME breaks their
> tests.
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list