-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Features/Milestones for 19.9 #1628
Comments
I am working on an alternative Router implementation. Whether it is something we want to introduce To Sanic is another question. My goal was to make it faster, but also to reduce and correct some of the... idiosyncrasies of the Sanic router. I should have my proposal ready in the next week or so. |
Fixing websockets in the native Sanic server. #1629 |
@yunstanford Here's what I have in my todo list
|
The I would be happy to work with you about those guidelines. It needs attention I agree. I also would like to get some people together to start working on a proper website: docs, examples, tutorial, announcements. Integrating that with |
Just opened a new Proposal ticket in Issue with the details #1630
Couldn't agree more. Getting the basic design right the first time is really important. I have the initial draft of the proposal. Please feel free to use the ticket for further discussion. I am eager to hear more from the @huge-success/sanic-core-devs
Right now the idea is to just simplify the effort required in managing the changelog while cutting a new release. But that can later be integrated with the
Absolutely. I would be more than happy to help in any way I can. |
I would like to see plugin API. As I see some extensions they all connected differently. It will allow build extensions in a unified way. Fix notorious bug that middleware blueprints are registered globally. |
@likern SPF has been around since October 2017, and has been compatible with all Sanic versions since Sanic v0.6.0. It adds a common plugin interface for Sanic, which can be used to create almost any kind of plugin. It also adds commonly requested features that plugins need, like a request-context dict. So far there are only four public plugins I know of that are made using SPF, and they are plugins I've written or ported personally. Its pretty hard to get other plugin makers to switch from their preferred ways of working. |
@ashleysommer I've seen your work and I like it. But plugin API should be officiall, so users and devs can be sure it's reliable and it will not break accidentally, it's difficult to invest time to plugin if SPF at time might become unsupported. But it might be merged as official or be base of plugin API Anyway, I think it's good time discuss plugin API and how to extend Sanic All major Node.js competitors have that support |
@likern Enabling a standardized way of writing plugin is one of the reasons I opened a new proposal under #1630 If implemented right, that proposal will go a long way in standardizing how the |
Regarding the unified plugin API, we should have an official spec in our Documentation, e.g if we adopt the one @ashleysommer created/proposed. |
Does it make sense for Sanic to have its own ORM rather than relying on SQLAlchemy? |
No. Sanic has nothing to do with databases (or templating etc). Besides, you could be using Redis, Mongo or other no-SQL databases (I certainly am). |
I'd be really interested in officially adopting @ashleysommer 's plugin framework to allow for standardizing things better as well as having a 'recommended, official' way for people to extend sanic. |
With ASGI in place, I'd like to start looking at deprecating the WSGI stuff. Stripping out the custom gunicorn workers and generally working toward 100% ASGI. 18.12LTS will continue to support them through 2020, and I'd like for us to have a decision for 19.9 so that we have a deprecation period before this year's LTS. |
@sjsadowski I'm happy to work closely with the rest of the devs to make SanicPluginsFramework the adopted standard for extending Sanic, if that is the path we choose to go down. The way SPF currently attaches to a Sanic App, is it uses monkey-patching to create wrappers for the This could be further streamlined by either:
|
@sjsadowski I am not sure that I am personally ready (nor do I think the project ready) to start discussing the deprecation of the gunicorn worker. I would like to see ASGI get a little more robust, and perhaps tackle that in the 2020 release cycle. @ashleysommer While I 100% appreciate what you have attempted with SPF, I do not personally like its approach with monkey-patching, etc. This is why I did not opt to use it for |
Giving the fact that sanic is async, I see no point on gunicon or similar About SPF: agree with @ahopkins: monkey-patching bad A side note: I tend to respect more projects that, from time to time, reduce their code base |
loading config from JSON |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If this is incorrect, please respond with an update. Thank you for your contributions. |
|
Hi @danieldaeschle |
thread for discussing goals of 19.9 release
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: