[stdlib-sig] Any ideas on how to handle urllib, urllib2, and urlparse?

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Quentin Gallet-Gilles wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 9:25 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Feb 20, 2008 8:47 AM, M.-A. Lemburg <mal at egenix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> How about using the following mapping:
>>>
>>> urllib  -> url.fetch
>>> urllib2 -> url.request
>>>
>> I can live with that. What do other people think?
>>
> 
> 
> I'm fine with it, if both packages are kept.
> But since it looks like urllib is considered inferior to urllib2, shouldn't
> it be possible to improve the latter (integrating whatever can be salvaged
> from urllib) and removing the former, in the spirit of Christian's
> suggestion ?

I wouldn't say it's inferior... it just uses a different approach
(plug in handlers rather than overriding methods).

BTW: Google Code Search gives 10000 hits for "import urllib2" and
38100 for "import urllib".

I bet most just use urllib[2]?.urlopen() anyway, without going into
any of the details.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Feb 20 2008)
 >>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
 >>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
 >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

:::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,MacOSX for free ! ::::


    eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
     D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
            Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611