Martin Panter added the comment: Why do people want “response_class” to be part of the API? If so, more details about it may need to added, e.g. the following methods and attributes seem to be required: _read_status(), fp, close(), isclosed(), begin() and will_close.
The “debuglevel” attribute seems fairly redundant with the existing set_debuglevel() method. Also, what is the point of adding the “default_port” attribute, if it cannot be modified? The only use case I can imagine is in a subclass that specifically does modify it. But I’m not sure it should be added at all. So I am sorry, but I don’t see why any of the three additions in the patch should be made. IMO it would be better to explain that “response_class” is an internal implementation detail, or even drop it entirely from the doc string. ---------- nosy: +vadmium _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13456> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com