Skip to content

/ cpython

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

bpo-39259: nntplib.NNTP/NNTP_SSL refactoring #17939

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
from
Open

bpo-39259: nntplib.NNTP/NNTP_SSL refactoring #17939

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@corona10
Copy link
Member

corona10 commented Jan 10, 2020 •
edited

This PR is only refactoring work, so the news is skipped. :)

https://bugs.python.org/issue39259
@corona10
nntplib.NNTP/NNTP_SSL refactoring
Loading status checks…
75f02df
@corona10 corona10 requested a review from vstinner Jan 10, 2020
@corona10 corona10 mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2020
Open
@vstinner vstinner changed the title nntplib.NNTP/NNTP_SSL refactoring bpo-39259: nntplib.NNTP/NNTP_SSL refactoring Jan 10, 2020
@vstinner vstinner removed the skip issue label Jan 10, 2020
@vstinner

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Member

vstinner commented Jan 10, 2020

This PR is only refactoring work, so I skip the news and issue.

I prefer to always attach a bpo to get more context. This change is connected to: https://bugs.python.org/issue39259
@vstinner
vstinner requested changes Jan 10, 2020
View changes
Copy link
Member

vstinner left a comment

Hum, you changed how _NNTPBase. With this change, I'm not sure that it's still relevant to have _NNTPBase and NNTP. What do you think of merging _NNTPBase and NNTP into NNTP? The most tricky part is to merge the two __init__() methods. Maybe just move NNTP code at the end of _NNTPBase.init().
Lib/nntplib.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@bedevere-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link

bedevere-bot commented Jan 10, 2020

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.
@corona10
bbpo-39259: Revert timeout check logic
Loading status checks…
99033c4
@corona10

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Member Author

corona10 commented Jan 10, 2020

@vstinner Yes, that's reasonable. I will update this PR with merging 2 classes.
@corona10

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Member Author

corona10 commented Jan 10, 2020

@vstinner

cpython/Lib/test/test_nntplib.py

Line 424 in 2e6a8ef

self.server = nntplib._NNTPBase(file, 'test.server', *args, **kwargs)

Hmm... _NNTPBase is also used for testing server code.
IMHO, if we merge _NNTPBase and NNTP, the work looks pretty large.
How about creating a separate issue for this (e.g remove _NNTPBase)?
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@vstinner vstinner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
CLA signed awaiting changes skip news
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
4 participants
@corona10 @vstinner @bedevere-bot @the-knights-who-say-ni
You can’t perform that action at this time.