On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:00:48PM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> Personally, I think very elaborate support for HTTP in httplib, and very
> few generalizations and abstractions in urllib* would be the "right"
> way to do it, IMO. For example, there might be the notion of an
> "http session" obj
Oleg Broytmann schrieb:
>HTTP is one of the most widely known and used protocol. Would you better
> have big httplib and small abstract urllib? so abstract it doesn't allow a
> user to change protocol-specific handling?
Personally, I think very elaborate support for HTTP in httplib, and very
f
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 09:05:49AM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> As for authenticated proxies: I think they ought to be implemented
> in httplib as well.
Agree.
> If everybody wants to become urllib just a better library to access
> http servers, I probably can't do much about it, though.
Oleg Broytmann schrieb:
>IMO you better don't because urllib2 provides not only an abstraction,
> but a lot of services (authenticated proxies, cached FTP files)...
If you are using http ranges, cached FTP files won't do any good.
As for authenticated proxies: I think they ought to be implemen
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> given that urllib2 already supports partial requests, I'm not sure I see
>> the point of reimplementing this on top of httplib. an example:
>>
>>import urllib2
>>
>>request = urllib2.Request("http://www.pythonware.com/daily/index.htm";)
>>request.add_header(
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 08:30:00AM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> If you add protocol-specifics to urllib, the abstraction that urllib
> provides goes away, and you are better off (IMO) to use the underlying
> protocol library in the first place.
IMO you better don't because urllib2 provides
Fredrik Lundh schrieb:
> given that urllib2 already supports partial requests, I'm not sure I see
> the point of reimplementing this on top of httplib. an example:
>
>import urllib2
>
>request = urllib2.Request("http://www.pythonware.com/daily/index.htm";)
>request.add_header("range
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> I've just been putting together a podcasting doodad and have included
>> resuming
>> support in it. Is this something that's already in the pipeline or should I
>> abstract it out to urllib and submit a patch?
>
> Not sure where you got the impression that 206 is "res
Daniel Watkins schrieb:
> I've just been putting together a podcasting doodad and have included
> resuming
> support in it. Is this something that's already in the pipeline or should I
> abstract it out to urllib and submit a patch?
Not sure where you got the impression that 206 is "resume"; in
Dan> I've just been putting together a podcasting doodad and have
Dan> included resuming support in it. Is this something that's already
Dan> in the pipeline or should I abstract it out to urllib and submit a
Dan> patch?
Check urllib2 before putting any effort into extending urlli
Hi guys,
I've just been putting together a podcasting doodad and have included resuming
support in it. Is this something that's already in the pipeline or should I
abstract it out to urllib and submit a patch?
Dan
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-De
11 matches
Mail list logo
