[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-17 Thread Senthil Kumaran
Senthil Kumaran orsent...@gmail.com added the comment: The functionality provided by urllib.request._urlopener can be accomplished in a more natural way using build_opener. Historically, _urlopener was there for urllib and build_opener style came in urllib2. So, I think, this can be safely be

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-17 Thread Senthil Kumaran
Senthil Kumaran orsent...@gmail.com added the comment: Actually, I see certain use-cases of _urlopener in py3k. Most visible one being urllib.request.urlretrieve and also URLOpener.open which is different from build_opener way of doing things. - But still, public exposure of overriding

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-17 Thread Senthil Kumaran
Senthil Kumaran orsent...@gmail.com added the comment: Removed in r81283 and r81284. With respect to the technical details of exposing this functionality for _urlretrieve and URLOpener. - users can still do it. - There is a better way, if the other global _opener be served for the same

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-05 Thread sri
sri sriram.thai...@gmail.com added the comment: You missed the code part: urllib._urlopener = AppURLopener() -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8619 ___

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-05 Thread Senthil Kumaran
Senthil Kumaran orsent...@gmail.com added the comment: Fixed in r80775 and r80776 -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8619 ___ ___

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-05 Thread R. David Murray
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment: Why do we have a public API that begins with an '_'? -- nosy: +r.david.murray ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8619 ___

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-05 Thread Senthil Kumaran
Senthil Kumaran orsent...@gmail.com added the comment: That is actually a private attribute of urllib (not urllib2) module present from the very first version. It is intended strictly for overriding purposes not for anything else. During the merge in py3k, it has taken its place in

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-05 Thread R. David Murray
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment: Mainly I'm saying that I don't think a public API should have a name starting with an '_'. Sets a bad precedent :) Looking at the functionality more closely, though, it does make me nervous that we are recommending changing the global

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-04 Thread Sriram Thaiyar
New submission from Sriram Thaiyar sriram.thai...@gmail.com: http://docs.python.org/dev/py3k/library/urllib.request.html#urllib.request._urlopener [in the body] urllib._urlopener should be urllib.request._urlopener -- assignee: d...@python components: Documentation messages: 104998

[issue8619] Doc bug for urllib.request._urlopener in Python 3.1+

2010-05-04 Thread Senthil Kumaran
Senthil Kumaran orsent...@gmail.com added the comment: Fixed in r80773 and r80774. Thanks. -- assignee: d...@python - orsenthil nosy: +orsenthil resolution: - fixed stage: - committed/rejected status: open - closed ___ Python tracker