-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 315
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
Allow ServerApp sub-class to override webapp handlers #80
Comments
@rolweber could add more insights but a Gateway extension will need similar functionality. |
I think there's a bigger conversation to be had here. I explored an approach where the server handlers were configurable, see #29 and #31, added it to an old draft of the Jupyter Server Enhancement proposal, and received negative feedback. Rather than remove handlers from the core jupyter server in subclasses, I think we need to define: What is the smallest unit that defines a jupyter server? Then, extra handlers (like nbconvert) become server extensions. This is open for discussion in the Jupyter Server enhancement proposal (though it's received little attention). There's even an issue opened to discuss this point specifically: jupyter/enhancement-proposals#31 I would encourage us to move this conversation over there, as this has big implications on the Jupyter ecosystem... |
I think the point of the Voila example is that it needs a Jupyter Server under the covers, but does not want to appear as a Jupyter Server externally, in the network. So even if we define what constitutes a Jupyter Server, a standalone application should still have the option to use |
I made a comment on the JEP issue trying to clarify the discussion. This PR would address what I list as point 2 there. |
Cool, I think this proposal makes sense then. Thanks, everyone, for clarifying (especially @vidartf for reviving conversation on the JEP). I think either "default_services" or "default_handlers" make sense. |
Closed by #84 |
* include version file * lint * cleanup
Given e.g. the case of Voilà, you want the server to not add some of the default handlers (while you want some of them). This should ideally be overridable by a subclass of
ServerApp
(but probably not user configurable?).Taking the Voilà example again, you probably want to:
These are all currently hard-coded in the web-app. I'm not sure what the best way to configure these would be, but the pattern from
extra_services
seems like a good one (maybedefault_services
?).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: