Author oubiwann
Recipients Rhamphoryncus, benjamin.peterson, ezio.melotti, giampaolo.rodola, gregory.p.smith, gvanrossum, loewis, mattsmart, oubiwann, pitrou, pmoody, pnasrat, shields
Date 2009-02-04.18:22:18
SpamBayes Score 2.68346e-07
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1233771741.66.0.82320520385.issue3959@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Antione,

We're (netaddr) going to try to use ipaddr if possible, but there are 
operations which we are providing to API users that aren't directly
supported by ipaddr. We haven't yet determined the level of effort
involved in trying to work with ipaddr's base classes in supporting
these, but it may be more effort (and code) than it's worth (the
benefits of using ipaddr may be lost).

In a sense, it would be a shame. But on the other hand, we have examples
where 3-rd party web frameworks don't use the built-in HTTP server, and
that hasn't been a problem. In many ways, netaddr is evolving into an IP
manipulation framework. Those that need its features can use it; those
that just need the basics will be able to get that in the stdlib.

In any case, it will be in our best interest to provide some
compatibility layer between the two :-)
History
Date User Action Args
2009-02-04 18:22:22oubiwannsetrecipients: + oubiwann, gvanrossum, loewis, gregory.p.smith, Rhamphoryncus, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, benjamin.peterson, ezio.melotti, mattsmart, shields, pmoody, pnasrat
2009-02-04 18:22:21oubiwannsetmessageid: <1233771741.66.0.82320520385.issue3959@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2009-02-04 18:22:20oubiwannlinkissue3959 messages
2009-02-04 18:22:18oubiwanncreate