[issue14307] Make subclassing SocketServer simpler for non-blocking frameworks

[STINNER Victor]

STINNER Victor <vstinner at python.org> added the comment:

> Hard to understand the reluctancy to _allow_ for a different way to handle accept timeouts.  But this is also why I stopped contributing to core, because it turned out to be more about lobbying than anything else.

To get a change merged into Python, you need to find someone who wants to be responsible for it: not only merge the change, but also maintain the code later. I touched socketserver recently for my work on making the Python CI more reliable. It was not easy to get a review. I ended to merge the changes with no review (if I recall properly).

I dislike socketserver design: it tries to be too generic. Like supporting TCP and UDP, support threading and forking models, etc.

To be honest, I didn't look at your issue. I only close it for bug triage, since there was no activity since 2016 and 2 core devs were against the change.

And you want to revisit the change, please reopen the issue.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue14307>
_______________________________________