[Web-SIG] [stdlib-sig] Choosing one of two options for url* in the stdlib reorg

[M.-A. Lemburg]

On 2008-03-01 05:06, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Seriously, I just don't want to support two different approaches to
> the same problem.

Then what makes you believe that the urllib2 approach is the
better one ?

Why not move urllib2 to PyPI and keep urllib ?

>>  It's not really an argument for dropping the more used module in
>>  favor of a different module without any real benefit.
> 
> Benefit to old users, no. Benefit to the developers, definitely.
> Benefit to new users, yes as there will be less to deal with.

Same question as above.

>>  You have to ask yourself whether
>>  it's ok to ask the maintainers of those ~1000 code modules
>>  using urllib for subclassing from the two main classes
>>  URLopener and FancyURLopener to download an external dependency
>>  from PyPI or ship the module with their code.
> 
> Well, I obviously think it is. 

Please explain. I have yet to see a single comment explaining why
urllib2 would be the better choice - if there's really a need to
decide (which I don't think there really is).

If you can put up some sound arguments for why urllib2 is better
than urllib, we could move the discussion forward. If not, then
I don't really see any benefit in having the discussion at all.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Mar 01 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