[Python-Dev] Re: Are "Batteries Included" still a Good Thing? [was: It's now time to deprecate the stdlib urllib module]

2022-03-29 Thread lincoln auster [they/them]
ith regards to urllib as a whole. Thanks so much! -- Lincoln Auster they/them ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-de

[Python-Dev] Re: Are "Batteries Included" still a Good Thing? [was: It's now time to deprecate the stdlib urllib module]

2022-03-28 Thread lincoln auster [they/them]
h I wasn't taking them in as a webservice. Deleting the > library would break this code. :( +1. If urllib is removed, I would very much like to preserve at least the functionality of urlparse /somewhere/. -- Lincoln Auster they/them ___ Python-Dev ma

[Python-Dev] Re: Are "Batteries Included" still a Good Thing? [was: It's now time to deprecate the stdlib urllib module]

2022-03-27 Thread lincoln auster [they/them]
tributed like that. If a given script cannot rely on the presence of some given module --- one which may need to be installed as though it were just another 3rd-party component --- then it's not really all that standard, is it? -- Lincoln Auster they/them _

[Python-Dev] Re: Are "Batteries Included" still a Good Thing? [was: It's now time to deprecate the stdlib urllib module]

2022-03-27 Thread lincoln auster [they/them]
t from a firm and semi-formal (re)definition of scope (hopefully in a manner motivated by real code). After that, it would probably benefit from patching up all the rough spots in the implementation side of things. To keep the metaphor going, let's recharge our dead batteries. -- lincoln auster th