[Twisted-web] Nevow future
manlio_perillo at libero.it
Tue Apr 11 14:56:18 CDT 2006
Jean-Paul Calderone ha scritto:
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:12:36 -0200, Manlio Perillo
> <manlio_perillo at libero.it> wrote:
>> I have used Nevow a bit, when it was at 0.4 version.
>> Now there seems to be a lot of changes, moreover twisted.web2 appears.
> Actually, quite a lot has remained the same as well. Many of the core
> concepts remain the same, many of the APIs remain unchanged, many
> programs which ran with Nevow 0.4 will continue to run unchanged with
> However, do notice the "0" at the beginning of these version
> numbers. That means "this software is not yet complete, expect some
For this reason I'm waiting some time before fully stud Nevow sources.
What are the major changes?
- direct support for zope.interfaces (and so no more lots of annoying
- LivePage -> Athena
- what about formless?
> When there is a 1.x release, you can begin to expect things
> to stop changing as much.
There are previsions?
>> What are the plane in the middle term for Nevow?
>> It will closely integrate with twisted.web2?
> That's one possibility.
>> It will remain indipendent from the underlying web server?
> It isn't independent from the underlying web server now, so saying that
> it would remain that way doesn't make sense.
Well, there is support for WSGI and an implementation with Zomne...
> Your Nevow applications should remain independent of it, though.
I would like to use lighttp as the *only* webserver, and Nevow *only*
for the rendering, session support, and so.
>> Now Nevow is realy only usable with twisted.web.
>> Reverse Proxy is not an option for me (*why* to use two or more
>> webservers and duplicate HTTP protocol handling?).
> Because it solves a problem? Why *not* do this?
I don't like the idea.
Is this really necessary?
>> Zonme is really safe to use?
> Who knows? Remember, Nevow comes with no guarantees. Personally, I
> wouldn't use it.
I have found no comments regarding its use.
>> Why there is not support for FastCGI (so I can use lighttp)?
> Because no one has implemented it.
Is FastCGI really hated or flawed?
The author of twisted.web2.channel.fastcgi seems not to like it.
Moreover I was unable to find some "use cases" of it in an asyncronous
> Feel free to contribute a FastCGI
> implementation, if you like. Efforts might better be spent finishing
> twisted.web2 (this includes writing documentation, test cases, examples,
> etc, not just coding) or figuring out how best to port Nevow to web2,
> since web2 supports FastCGI already.
Now the twisted.web2 implementation support only the Responder role,
what about the Authorizer and Filter roles?
I'm very interested in this but I'm not an expert.
In the end, is FastCGI really worth of further investigations?
Thanks and regards ManlioPerillo
More information about the Twisted-web