 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
 |
 |
|
|
03-10-06 07:45 AM
I have had patches for adding server side include support into
mod_python ready for a while now. See:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-104
In short, it would add the ability to add Python code into files
being served up through the INCLUDES output filter. More
commonly this is known as server side include (SSI). For example:
<!--#python exec="
from mod_python import apache
import cgi
import sys
parts = apache.import_module('parts')
def _escape(object):
return cgi.escape(str(object))
"-->
<html>
<body>
<pre>
<!--#python eval="_escape(str(globals().keys()))"-->
<!--#python eval="_escape(str(locals().keys()))"-->
<!--#python exec="
print >> filter
for key in filter.req.subprocess_env:
print >> filter, _escape((key, filter.req.subprocess_env[key]))
"-->
<!--#python eval="parts.content()"-->
</pre>
</body>
</html>
One could say that there is an overlap between this and the
mod_python.psp handler, but the SSI feature is a builtin feature of
Apache and it make sense to support it. Using SSI, if one was mad
enough, you could even have Python and PERL code appearing in the one
file.
Anyway, the point of this email is to get a decision on whether this
major new feature should or should not be added into mod_python.
Core developer votes obviously matter the most, but others are more
than welcome to voice an opinion.
So, is it a Yes or a No?
Graham
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
03-10-06 12:47 PM
+1
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
> I have had patches for adding server side include support into
> mod_python ready for a while now. See:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-104
>
> In short, it would add the ability to add Python code into files
> being served up through the INCLUDES output filter. More
> commonly this is known as server side include (SSI). For example:
>
> <!--#python exec="
> from mod_python import apache
> import cgi
> import sys
> parts = apache.import_module('parts')
> def _escape(object):
> return cgi.escape(str(object))
> "-->
> <html>
> <body>
> <pre>
> <!--#python eval="_escape(str(globals().keys()))"-->
> <!--#python eval="_escape(str(locals().keys()))"-->
> <!--#python exec="
> print >> filter
> for key in filter.req.subprocess_env:
> print >> filter, _escape((key, filter.req.subprocess_env[key]))
> "-->
> <!--#python eval="parts.content()"-->
> </pre>
> </body>
> </html>
>
> One could say that there is an overlap between this and the
> mod_python.psp handler, but the SSI feature is a builtin feature of
> Apache and it make sense to support it. Using SSI, if one was mad
> enough, you could even have Python and PERL code appearing in the one
> file.
>
> Anyway, the point of this email is to get a decision on whether this
> major new feature should or should not be added into mod_python.
>
> Core developer votes obviously matter the most, but others are more
> than welcome to voice an opinion.
>
> So, is it a Yes or a No?
>
> Graham
>
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
03-10-06 10:46 PM
+1
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
> I have had patches for adding server side include support into
> mod_python ready for a while now. See:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-104
>
> In short, it would add the ability to add Python code into files
> being served up through the INCLUDES output filter. More
> commonly this is known as server side include (SSI). For example:
>
> <!--#python exec="
> from mod_python import apache
> import cgi
> import sys
> parts = apache.import_module('parts')
> def _escape(object):
> return cgi.escape(str(object))
> "-->
> <html>
> <body>
> <pre>
> <!--#python eval="_escape(str(globals().keys()))"-->
> <!--#python eval="_escape(str(locals().keys()))"-->
> <!--#python exec="
> print >> filter
> for key in filter.req.subprocess_env:
> print >> filter, _escape((key, filter.req.subprocess_env[key]))
> "-->
> <!--#python eval="parts.content()"-->
> </pre>
> </body>
> </html>
>
> One could say that there is an overlap between this and the
> mod_python.psp handler, but the SSI feature is a builtin feature of
> Apache and it make sense to support it. Using SSI, if one was mad
> enough, you could even have Python and PERL code appearing in the one
> file.
>
> Anyway, the point of this email is to get a decision on whether this
> major new feature should or should not be added into mod_python.
>
> Core developer votes obviously matter the most, but others are more
> than welcome to voice an opinion.
>
> So, is it a Yes or a No?
>
> Graham
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
03-10-06 10:46 PM
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
> I don't understand this enough to have an opinion on it, seems like
> another way to skin a cat, but to really form an opinion would require
> some thinking on my part at least (may be I'm getting thick with age).
[vbcol=seagreen]
I'm intrigued by this statement. I've always found SSI to be limited,
but this could turn that notion on its head. Imagine writing an
application that uses HTML, JavaScript, CSS, Python, Perl, PHP, Ruby,
Lisp, & SQL, all in one file. Now, that's job security! 
But seriously, I feel that exploring these hooks could lead to
discoveries that might benefit mod_python in the long run, as long as it
doesn't introduce stability or security issues.
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
03-10-06 10:46 PM
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
> I don't understand this enough to have an opinion on it, seems like
> another way to skin a cat,
Yes, but perhaps just for small cats. ;)
Quoting from http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/howto/ssi.html
"SSI is certainly not a replacement for CGI, or other technologies used
for generating dynamic web pages. But it is a great way to add small
amounts of dynamic content to pages, without doing a lot of extra work."
Jim
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
03-10-06 10:46 PM
+0
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
> Anyway, the point of this email is to get a decision on whether this
> major new feature should or should not be added into mod_python.
>
> Core developer votes obviously matter the most, but others are more
> than welcome to voice an opinion.
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
03-12-06 07:45 AM
Not seeing any negatives, I am going to go ahead and commit the SSI
stuff. Comments that this is just another way to skin a cat are true,
even if a small cat. I guess the reason for doing it is to fill out
those basic features that can be filled out by using just what Apache
provides.
Anyway, I'll try and get around to writing one of my mini articles
about the feature and also use some of that for inclusion into the
mod_python documentation itself. Maybe from writing a mini article
it might become more apparent how its simplicity can be just as useful
as any other approach for getting small tasks down quickly.
Graham
On 11/03/2006, at 1:43 AM, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I don't understand this enough to have an opinion on it, seems like
> another way to skin a cat, but to really form an opinion would require
> some thinking on my part at least (may be I'm getting thick with age).
>
> I think it'd be great if those who send in +1's (or -1's) would
> explain why they think this is good, and even if it's not so useful,
> then is it worth being supported and maintained in the future.
>
> Grisha
>
> On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Jim Gallacher wrote:
>
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Vote on whether to integrate server side include (SSI) support. |
|
|
|
|
03-12-06 12:45 PM
* Graham Dumpleton wrote:
> Not seeing any negatives, I am going to go ahead and commit the SSI
> stuff. Comments that this is just another way to skin a cat are true,
> even if a small cat. I guess the reason for doing it is to fill out
> those basic features that can be filled out by using just what Apache
> provides.
If that's a point, you know, what would be really great in this case? To be=
=20
able to register own SSI handlers using mod_python instead of (or in=20
addition to) this generic #python thingy, which nobody really seems to be=20
able to classify/justify. Like registering a name and a callback function=20
with a fixed signature.
What do you think?
nd
=2D-=20
die (eval q-qq:Just Another PERL Hacker
:-)
# Andr=E9 Malo, <http://www.perlig.de/> #
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sponsored Links |
|
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:55 AM. |
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is OFF
|
|
|
|
Medical and Health forum | Computer Games Reviews | Graphics design forum
|
 |
|
 |
|
