[python-advocacy] Python makes the "most wanted list"

[Tal Einat]

Michael Foord wrote:

> Facundo Batista wrote:
> > 2008/2/11, Jeff Younker <jeff at drinktomi.com>:
> >
> >
> >> enough.  People don't read the documentation in enough detail.  If
> >> the library is leading to a problem, then the default for the library
> >> needs to be changed.
> >>
> >
>
> My understanding is that it does have a default user-agent.(that looks
> very similar to the one you suggest).
>
> The only thing that would work (as far as I can tell), is to force the
> programmer to set an explicit user-agent rather than sending a default
> one. This would obviously break a lot of code and there is no guarantee
> that programmers would set it to anything useful...


I am firmly against removing the default User-Agent string in urllib.

I agree that forcing users to explicitly set a User-Agent string is the only
way to get everyone using urllib to set their own User-Agent strings. But
many applications will still end up using the same User-Agent strings
(because underlying frameworks will set a default of their own). And, on the
other hand, many users will set User-Agent strings which won't help contact
the application's maintainer.

The beauty and usefulness of urllib rely on the fact that it Just Works. If
I just want to retrieve a web page, a simple HTTP GET command, it should be
_simple_. If urllib forces developers to set all sorts of things they don't
know or care about, like User-Agent strings, they won't use it. Some of them
will even leave Python and use a different language which has a friendlier
library for this purpose.


But I'm not just going to be negative...

I propose that we update the docs (!!). Yes, I did read the post about why
documentation doesn't help, but I think context matters here, as well as
time spans.

Anyone doing more than just a few quick retrievals of web pages with urllib
is bound to consult the docs sometime. If urllib's docs have a prominent
note regarding setting the User-Agent, many of these people will notice it.
I'm not talking about seasoned pros in the field who know the tool and have
no reason to consult the docs; I'm talking about new users learning as their
requirements expand, who will definitely consult the docs at some point.

Other than that, basic users who will only use urllib's most basic features
(probably by copy-pasting code from some tutorial/blog/forum) will never set
a meaningful User-Agent anyways, and forcing them to in any way will be
counter-productive on our part.

As for existing applications/frameworks which don't set User-Agent strings,
in the long run they will eventually notice a prominent note in the docs. To
help things along in the short term, I think it would be better to reach
them by conventional means than by breaking their code or otherwise forcing
them to make such a change. ("conventional" meaning posts like these to
mailing lists/forums, and perhaps a few on comp.lang.python and some blogs.)


- Tal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/advocacy/attachments/20080212/75db3f71/attachment-0001.htm