issues: 324188953
This data as json
| id | node_id | number | title | user | state | locked | assignee | milestone | comments | created_at | updated_at | closed_at | author_association | pull_request | body | repo | type | active_lock_reason | performed_via_github_app | reactions | draft | state_reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 324188953 | MDU6SXNzdWUzMjQxODg5NTM= | 272 | Port Datasette to ASGI | 9599 | closed | 0 | 9599 | 3268330 | 42 | 2018-05-17T21:16:32Z | 2019-06-24T04:54:15Z | 2019-06-24T03:33:06Z | OWNER | Datasette doesn't take much advantage of Sanic, and I'm increasingly having to work around parts of it because of idiosyncrasies that are specific to Datasette - caring about the exact order of querystring arguments for example. Since Datasette is GET-only our needs from a web framework are actually pretty slim. This becomes more important as I expand the plugins #14 framework. Am I sure I want the plugin ecosystem to depend on a Sanic if I might move away from it in the future? If Datasette wasn't all about async/await I would use WSGI, but today it makes more sense to use ASGI. I'd like to be confident that switching to ASGI would still give me the excellent performance that Sanic provides. https://github.com/django/asgiref/blob/master/specs/asgi.rst |
107914493 | issue | {
"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/272/reactions",
"total_count": 1,
"+1": 1,
"-1": 0,
"laugh": 0,
"hooray": 0,
"confused": 0,
"heart": 0,
"rocket": 0,
"eyes": 0
} |
completed |