Re: pyblosxom 3000

Bill Mill wrote:
<snip>
> 
> This is the type of change I think we need to get started on. Do we
> want to break compatibility for some modules for the next release? I
> say yes, and that we should start breaking what we need to soon, so
> that we can get a solid 1.2 api in place.
> 
> 
<snip>
> 
> I like it; want to work on it and submit a patch? I don't think it'd
> be that hard to redirect all output through a response object.
> 

Currently I do this by subclassing Pyblosxom.pyblosxom.Request and 
adding a few methods like those shown below.

Inputstream:
infile = request.read()
infilepart = request.read(1024)
inline = request.readline()
inlines = request.readlines()

Outputstream:
response = request.getResponse()
response.addHeader('Content-Type', 'text/plain')
response.write("Hello World")
response.writelines(["whatever", "you", "want"])

See http://www.c-area.ch/code/pyblosxom/wsgi.py for details.

I use a custom renderer that overrides showHeaders and proxies the given 
headers through to the response object.
http://www.c-area.ch/code/pyblosxom/renderers/wsgi.py

I have also written a compatibility plugin that emulates the above so my 
other plugins also work in a non wsgi environment.
http://www.c-area.ch/code/pyblosxom/plugins/compatibility.py


One possibility I see is to just add the modules I wrote to the core 
distribution. The other to actually patch my code in.

Pick your poison :)

Other thoughts/ideas?

cheers
Steven


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt