[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

PEP 594 cgi & cgitb removal

Re cgitb, not sure if this is what you want, but I just came across this
this week:

On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 3:52 AM Robin Becker <robin at> wrote:

> In PEP 594 t has been proposed that cgi & cgitb should be removed. I
> suspect I am not the only person in the world that likes
> using cgi and cgitb.
> One of the nice features in cgitb is the ability to get a nice traceback
> with variable values etc etc etc. I have used the
> underlying mechanism to produce better traceback information on several
> occasions and not only in cgi applications.
> I filed a bug against cgitb in 2004 with (apparently unacceptable patches)
> that is still unfixed.
> Although cgi is claimed to be dead it is still one of the easiest ways to
> get a web service to operate; it is also stateless and
> robust. If cgi and similar are removed from the stdlib python will become
> significantly less charged. These batteries are not dead
> they are pining.
> There is some discussion on the python-dev list of moving these allegedly
> dead packages to pypi, but of course that means issues
> of control, where do the sources reside and other politics.
> Django has a similar feature to cgitb's output for tracebacks, but is too
> deeply embedded for use elsewhere; is there anything
> suitable elsewhere?
> --
> Robin Becker
> --