[issue35928] socket makefile read-write discards received data
Change by nr : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +11912 stage: needs patch -> patch review ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue35928> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue5038] urrlib2/httplib doesn't reset file position between requests
nr added the comment: PR 11843 should fix the issue in master, I didn't check python 2.6 or prior versions. The problem is that in the first request sent to HTTP service the POST data is sent correctly. After that the HTTP server responds with 401 and the request is resent but the mmap file pointer is pointing now to the end of the file because it has been fully read in the requests before. The PR just seeks to the beginning of the file after the file has been read and sends the request with auth credentials including POST body. -- nosy: +nr ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue5038> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue35928] socket makefile read-write discards received data
nr added the comment: Added PR 11878, this will pass both this bug report and PR 3918 regression, the commit Ammar noted, it is an addition to this change. -- nosy: +nr ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue35928> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue5038] urrlib2/httplib doesn't reset file position between requests
Change by nr : -- pull_requests: +11930 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue5038> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue5038] urrlib2/httplib doesn't reset file position between requests
nr added the comment: I added a new pull request. Martin, you are right I realized when looking through the code that just setting the file pointer to zero inside http lib might interfere with requests that don't have authentication enabled. The new pull requests does number 2.) of your suggestion for both Basic and Digest authentication. Can you please review the code? Thank you. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue5038> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue5038] urrlib2/httplib doesn't reset file position between requests
nr added the comment: I will fix the build errors first. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue5038> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue5038] urrlib2/httplib doesn't reset file position between requests
nr added the comment: the pull request now passed the build checks, please review the code. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue5038> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20116] urlparse.parse_qs should take argument for query separator
nr added the comment:
W3C allows both constructs, ampersand and semicolon.
https://www.w3.org/TR/html401/appendix/notes.html#h-B.2.2
Especially servlet containers and servers running CGI programs often use
semicolons as a separator.
I would say to parse either ampersands OR semicolons and keep a priority to
ampersands.
For example the query strings:
?fields=id&query=%22((release%3D{id%3D1004});(sprint%3D{id%3D1040});(team%3D{id%3D1004});(severity%3D{id%3D%27list_node.severity.urgent%27});!phase%3D{id+IN+%27phase.defect.closed%27,%27phase.defect.duplicate%27,%27phase.defect.rejected%27})%22
?fruits=lemon;lime&family=citrus
should be parsed with & separators only.
The modified example without & character:
?fruits=lemon;family=citrus
can be parsed with semicolon as a separator because it contains both '=' and
';' but no '&' characters.
--
nosy: +nr
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue20116>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue35941] ssl.enum_certificates() regression
Change by nr : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +11948 stage: -> patch review ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue35941> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue35941] ssl.enum_certificates() regression
nr added the comment: Adjusted the code to conform with PEP 7. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue35941> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue35941] ssl.enum_certificates() regression
nr added the comment: To be honest, I think the patch is worth to be merged including other patches I submitted. Yet I believed it was better to close the pull request because I put quite some time into researching and programming the solutions but nobody really cared so I stopped. All I received from my work was a "Awaiting merge" screen on my laptop. It was really discouraging to see how things work here in the python development community so I decided to leave instead of waiting a month or more and at the end looking at the "Awaiting to merge" screen or being rejected again. Thanks Christian for asking why I closed the PR at last. Just look at the date when the patch was submitted until it was put into awaiting patch mode again then you see what I mean. If anybody still wants me to submit patches please say so instead of completely ignoring me and my work. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue35941> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
