[Web-SIG] Two options for handling urllib
brett at python.org
Sun Mar 2 21:15:42 CET 2008
MAL and I have obviously been going back and forth about two options
on how to handle urllib.
One option is to move URLOpener and FancyURLOpener over to what is
currently urllib2 and leave it at that. MAL's argument is that this is
easier on people who use urllib's more advanced features. It also
means users don't need to ship an extra module with their code.
The second option is to not move the code over but provide urllib as a
downloadable module from PyPI in a 3.0-compatible version. My argument
for this is that we should have just a single approach for URLs and be
done with it. Providing urllib externally allows people to let their
code to continue to work, albeit with one third-party module.
What do other people think? Either solution is acceptable to me, so I
would really appreciate feedback.
More information about the Web-SIG