On 11/18/2012 12:36 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
>
> A couple of comments:
>
> - the patch needs a test (and docs too)

Will do (when I have time).

> - are you sure ignoring POSTed data is the right thing to do? Shouldn't we forbid it instead?
> - I think it would be nice to reference the RFC number somewhere
> - not sure why you raise IOError on a bad URL; I would say ValueError is the right exception here
>

I did that because that's what the old URLopener code does (ignoring POSTed data and raising an 
IOError). The comment is actually a 1:1 copy of the old code.

> +1 on the general idea, by the way.
>
> ----------
> nosy: +pitrou
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16423>
> _______________________________________
>