Message121462
In case it isn't clear from the discussion in issue8792: I'd be in favor of supporting extensions as long as their usage is an opt-in feature. The current nil support is already an opt-in feature. If alternative spellings of nil need to be supported, or other extensions, it might be necessary to refactor this extension support a bit, so that extensions can be independently be developed and activated.
As for Python's usage of nil: it is specified in
http://ontosys.com/xml-rpc/extensions.php
and also referenced in the Wikipedia. IMO, it would have been better if Apache had used the pre-existing extension, instead of coming up with its own (supposedly only because the pre-existing one wasn't namespace-based). |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-11-18 15:35:13 | loewis | set | recipients:
+ loewis, orsenthil, eric.araujo, Adam.Bielański |
2010-11-18 15:35:13 | loewis | set | messageid: <1290094513.6.0.847491090755.issue10425@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2010-11-18 15:35:11 | loewis | link | issue10425 messages |
2010-11-18 15:35:11 | loewis | create | |
|