On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Brett Cannon wrote: > > > which I am liking. But I figured I would ask if there is any remote > > > chance the this SIG has plans to either merge urllib and urllib2 or > > > come up with a new module, or something before 3.0 comes out. > > > > httplib2 is basically a replacement for urllib. I personally prefer it > > to urllib. I don't know how other people feel, or Joe's thoughts (the > > author). > > > > Since no one has stepped forward to go through the hoops necessary to > get it into the stdlib I am not going to worry about it for this > issue.
I submitted my contributor agreement a while ago, so it should be on file. My goal has always been to bring forward httplib2 for inclusion in the std lib, but I didn't want to do that until I got support for proxies, which just recently went in, and then there's starting to work at Google which has soaked up all my time as I got up to speed. Anyway, enough excuses. I am willing to go through the hoops necessary to get into the std lib if someone wants to guide me in that process. Thanks, -joe > > Somewhat ironically httplib2 has a scope that is closer to urllib than > > httplib. It would be nice if this naming style (x and x2) didn't persist. > > > > That's the point of this endeavor. > > It has been suggested by Fred on the stdlib-sig that urllib should > just be tossed in favor of urllib2 since most people probably just use > urlopen() and that is mostly compatible between the two. What do > people think of that idea? > > -Brett > -- Joe Gregorio http://bitworking.org _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com