Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> added the comment:
> 
> Hah, I've been dealing with Python's regression test suite for 8+ years and there are still cases where I don't understand the rationale for testing things a particular way (beyond "it must have seemed like a good idea at the time"). It has a lot more historical cruft than the standard library does :)
> 
> The "proper" location for a particular test can be a bit of a coin toss in many cases, but one useful guide (which applies in this case) is to try to avoid adding *new* standard library dependencies to a test module if there's an alternate suitable location that already has those dependencies.

I just checked the patch and it still applies cleanly with the two 
effected tests passing.

Nick, any chance of getting this checked in and closed?