[openstack-dev] [all] [api] Reminder: WSME is not being actively maintained
davanum at gmail.com
Tue Mar 8 12:50:30 UTC 2016
24 instances as shown by codesearch:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>>> 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
>>> plan as to encourage volunteer contributions, even thou there are not
>>> of those.
>> That is pretty much the main question: Does OpenStack want to fix
>>> That's my 2 cents!
>> Thank you!
>>> (*) I remember that a change I did to correct an HTTP status code
>>> 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
>> 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
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims
More information about the OpenStack-dev