On Feb 20, 2008 9:47 AM, M.-A. Lemburg
Christian Heimes wrote:
Facundo Batista wrote:
What to do with the methods that will be lost because of keeping a slightly different one with the same functionality? We could keep them with a deprecation warning, or simply let them disappear (+0 for the former, even considering we're in 3k).
Merging urllib and urllib2 into a completely new module with a (although slightly) different API is a good thing. But it also increases the burden and workload for Python users. We should keep the original modules around if a change can't be handled by a 2to3 fixer. We can always deprecate a module for 3.1.
For urllib/urllib2 I propose:
* merge the functionality into a new, improved module * keep the original ones around for 3.0 and schedule them for removal in 3.1.
I'm not sure that would work: urllib is one of the most used modules in Python when it comes to doing even only slightly web-related work.
I've never used urllib2 and am not sure what the reason was for adding it. It doesn't appear to offer more or better things than urllib... to late to argue, I guess ;-)
I'm pretty sure the intent of urllib2 is to give better error messages than urllib. I only use urllib2 in my own code for that reason. (I don't remember what confusing error I got from urllib that made me switch, but I remember that there was one.) Steve -- I'm not *in*-sane. Indeed, I am so far *out* of sane that you appear a tiny blip on the distant coast of sanity. --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy