Roundup Robot added the comment:
New changeset a182367eac5a by Antoine Pitrou in branch 'default':
Issue #16423: urllib.request now has support for ``data:`` URLs.
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a182367eac5a
--
nosy: +python-dev
___
Python tracker
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
I've committed your patch after having made the few very minor changes
mentioned in the review. Thank you very much!
--
assignee: orsenthil -
resolution: - invalid
stage: patch review - committed/rejected
status: open - closed
Mathias Panzenböck added the comment:
Great!
Feels awesome to have my first bit of code contributed to the Python project. :)
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
___
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
You're welcome! We're always happy to have new contributors.
I've forgotten something: could you sign a contributor agreement?
You'll find instructions at http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/
--
___
Python tracker
Mathias Panzenböck added the comment:
Will do (later today).
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Mathias Panzenböck added the comment:
Hmm, which of the two initial licenses should I choose? Which one do you rather
want me to choose?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
Hmm, which of the two initial licenses should I choose? Which one do
you rather want me to choose?
Whichever you prefer. They should be equivalent in their terms
(non-copyleft free licenses).
--
___
Python tracker
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
On 11/18/2012 12:36 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
- the patch needs a test (and docs too)
- are you sure ignoring POSTed data is the right thing to do? Shouldn't we
forbid it instead?
Btw.: The file:// protocol handler also just ignores posted data, so
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
A couple of comments:
- the patch needs a test (and docs too)
- are you sure ignoring POSTed data is the right thing to do? Shouldn't we
forbid it instead?
- I think it would be nice to reference the RFC number somewhere
- not sure why you raise IOError on a
Mathias Panzenböck added the comment:
On 11/18/2012 12:36 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
A couple of comments:
- the patch needs a test (and docs too)
Will do (when I have time).
- are you sure ignoring POSTed data is the right thing to do? Shouldn't we
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
- are you sure ignoring POSTed data is the right thing to do? Shouldn't we
forbid it instead?
- I think it would be nice to reference the RFC number somewhere
- not sure why you raise IOError on a bad URL; I would say ValueError is
the right
Mathias Panzenböck added the comment:
On 11/18/2012 12:36 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
- the patch needs a test (and docs too)
- are you sure ignoring POSTed data is the right thing to do? Shouldn't we
forbid it instead?
Btw.: The file:// protocol handler also just ignores posted data, so I
Mathias Panzenböck added the comment:
Ok, I've added a documentation and some tests. Is it ok this way? More tests?
More/other documentation?
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file28017/urllib.request-data-url.patch
___
Python tracker
Changes by Mathias Panzenböck grosser.meister.mo...@gmx.net:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file28017/urllib.request-data-url.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
___
Changes by Mathias Panzenböck grosser.meister.mo...@gmx.net:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file28018/urllib.request-data-url.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
___
Changes by Mathias Panzenböck grosser.meister.mo...@gmx.net:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file27994/urllib.request-data-url.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
___
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com:
--
stage: - patch review
versions: -Python 3.1, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.5
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
___
Mathias Panzenböck added the comment:
New patch. Instead of adding the data URL support to the doc as a recipe I
added it to urllib.request directly. I think this is better and justified,
because the old legacy URLopener had (some kind) of support for data URLs.
OT: I think that the legacy
Changes by Mathias Panzenböck grosser.meister.mo...@gmx.net:
--
components: +Library (Lib) -Documentation
title: urllib data URL recipe - urllib data URL
type: - enhancement
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
New submission from Mathias Panzenböck:
I think it would be really helpful if urllib would support data URLs. However,
I was told on the python-ideas mailing list that it would probably only added
as recipe in the documentation. The attached patch adds such an recipe to the
urllib.request
Changes by Senthil Kumaran sent...@uthcode.com:
--
assignee: docs@python - orsenthil
nosy: +orsenthil
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue16423
___
21 matches
Mail list logo
