Remove some urllib and future.standard_library usages #2140
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
megies
changed the title
|
Rebased on current master and force-pushed so that we have fresh CI results tomorrow. |
|
Bump to 2.0.0 |
|
Obsolete. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
with future.standard_library.hooks():with either importing in aif/elsedepending on Python 2/3 or by usingrequests.compat(which is internally doing just the same as well)urllibusages withrequestsWhy was it initiated? Any relevant Issues?
Closes #1254. Even if not all urllib usage is replaced, I think getting rid of
future.standard_libraryshould resolve the problem reported in #1254 (e.g. seen here: http://tests.obspy.org/35446/)PR Checklist
masterfor new features,maintenance_...for bug fixes