rack-devel archive mirror (unofficial) https://groups.google.com/group/rack-devel
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Samuel Williams <space.ship.traveller@gmail.com>
To: Rack Development <rack-devel@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: HTTP2: Are we there yet?
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 20:02:17 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9952888d-17b0-4a8b-8d61-29698fe28648@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABGa_T_rUgBz+MGhgwyFrw=6giMNk0NoBByTK1Rw9HhG1DUd5Q@mail.gmail.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1611 bytes --]

I've thought about these issues too.

I don't think there is anything wrong with Rack. It could be tidied up a 
bit and it's good, IMHO, that it's entered maintenance mode. Not much needs 
to change IMHO. It's solid. Big changes here will only cause chaos.

In my mind, HTTP2 is more about communication between client and front-end 
server. If the application server implements HTTP1 that's fine. Let's face 
it, in production we don't usually use Rack to serve static files, etc.

Additionally, in my mind, an HTTP application server is no place for 
real-time communication. They are two separate concerns. For example, we 
have a real-time web chat system which implements a real-time run-loop 
using multiple event-driven reactors. It still communicates with a backend 
database using the same code as our application server, but it works in a 
way which can scale to 1000s of active connections per instance.

I think that trying to shoehorn these orthogonal concerns into Rack is 
probably a bad idea in general and will just destroy the original beauty of 
`response = app.call(env)`.

I'd prefer to see Rack evolve in a way which makes it better as an 
application server for request/response type workloads. If we need to 
augment that with something else, let's figure that out in a different 
framework?

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rack Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rack-devel+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1953 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2016-08-09  3:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-15 22:28 HTTP2: Are we there yet? Tiago Cardoso
2016-01-15 23:00 ` James Tucker
2016-01-16  1:15 ` Eric Wong
2016-01-16  1:25 ` Aaron Patterson
2016-01-16  2:13   ` James Tucker
2016-08-09  3:02     ` Samuel Williams [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://groups.google.com/group/rack-devel

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=9952888d-17b0-4a8b-8d61-29698fe28648@googlegroups.com \
    --to=rack-devel@googlegroups.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).