Nic Ferrier
nferrier at tapsellferrier.co.uk
Mon Oct 17 09:22:21 EDT 2005
"Graham Dumpleton" <grahamd at dscpl.com.au> writes: > Such things probably haven't been added for a couple of reasons. > > The first is that mod_python up to 3.1.4 worked with older versions of > Python such as 2.2, but the "logging" module didn't exist in those older > versions of Python. With mod_python 3.2 there is opportunity to use > newer features as Python 2.3 or later will be a requirement, but > .... I can't see why this is a valid point... a 2.3 logging package wouldn't have to be used by people with 2.2. It's purely optional in terms of imports. But really useful to anyone with 2.3+ > Second is that the intention is that mod_python be good at its core > functionality and not accumulate a lot of extra baggage. Given that the > logging interface is simple enough that users can write their own and > given that logging interfaces are often customised to specific > applications and therefore a generic one may not always be suitable > anyway, I am sure that some will argue that it shouldn't be in > mod_python. Really?? But they're so simple - difficult to argue over it I'd have thought. > What I might suggest is that you post up your code as an example on > the Python cookbook site. > > http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Python/Cookbook/ Sure... But that's not the point. The value of having it included in mod_python is that it's packaged up. If I put it anywhere else then either people have to cut and paste into their code all the time or they have an additional dependancy on something. That's bad. I'd be happy to contribute and help mine. Nic
|