gh-102247: http: support rfc9110 status codes

[mbeijen]

rfc9110 obsoletes the earlier rfc 7231. This document also includes some status codes that were previously only used for WebDAV and assigns more generic names to these status codes.

ref: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html#name-changes-from-rfc-7231

• http.HTTPStatus.CONTENT_TOO_LARGE (413, previously REQUEST_ENTITY_TOO_LARGE)
• http.HTTPStatus.URI_TOO_LONG (414, previously REQUEST_URI_TOO_LONG)
• http.HTTPStatus.RANGE_NOT_SATISFYABLE (416, previously REQUEST_RANGE_NOT_SATISFYABLE)
• http.HTTPStatus.UNPROCESSABLE_CONTENT (422, previously UNPROCESSABLE_ENTITY)

The new constants are added to http.HTTPStatus and the old constants are preserved for backwards compatibility.

References in documentation to the obsoleted rfc 7231 are updated

An earlier attempt at implementing RFC 9110 status codes was made but was closed by the author without getting merged; see #102570

One problem with this PR (and the previous attempt) is that the unit test currently checks the enum order which now is different, and it's not obvious how to use enum._test_simple_enum() to make the test not fail.

The last time @corona10 asked @ethanfurman for advise but the PR was closed before this feedback was given. @ethanfurman is the enum 'mastermind' and has converted http.HTTPStatus into an enum, so indeed I would like to ask their advise here

• Issue: Update HTTP status codes in http package to match rfc9110 #102247

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--117611.org.readthedocs.build/

[cpython-cla-bot]

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.

[bedevere-app]

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry. Add one using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

If this change has little impact on Python users, wait for a maintainer to apply the skip news label instead.

[ethanfurman]

The current mismatch error is due to a bug in the _simple_enum decorator. Working on a fix.

[mbeijen]

Great, thanks for the quick feedback!

[ethanfurman]

Looks like a mismatch in the new Range not Satisfiable member. Once that's fixed and the _simple_enum decorator is fixed, this should be good to go.

[bedevere-app]

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.

Requested changes suboptimal.

[ethanfurman]

Instead of respecifying the legacy entries, just assign the new entry. I.e.:

REQUESTED_RANGE_NOT_SATISFIABLE = RANGE_NOT_SATISFIABLE

[bedevere-app]

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.

[mbeijen]

Instead of respecifying the legacy entries, just assign the new entry. I.e.:

REQUESTED_RANGE_NOT_SATISFIABLE = RANGE_NOT_SATISFIABLE

I changed this as you suggested, but I wanted to point out that this changes the behaviour of the old constants slightly, the number in the resulting tuple is still the same, but the message now differs to the RFC 9110 version. I'm not fully sure this is desirable.

Looks like a mismatch in the new Range not Satisfiable member. Once that's fixed and the _simple_enum decorator is fixed, this should be good to go.

Thanks, I fixed that and if I rebase on f931992 the tests now pass. I'll wait for #117664 to be merged before I'l request review again

[ethanfurman]

Because the HTTPStatus codes are IntEnums, we cannot have different members with the same numerical value -- so fully specifying the legacy settings is useless, because, for example, the object that is REQUESTED_RANGE_NOT_SATISFIABLE will be thrown away, and the name will become an alias to RANGE_NOT_SATISFIABLE.

In other words, once the transformation to IntEnum is complete:

>>> HTTPStatus.REQUESTED_RANGE_NOT_SATISFIABLE is HTTPStatus.RANGE_NOT_SATISFIABLE
True

[mbeijen]

OK, thanks for pointing this out

[mbeijen]

I have made the requested changes; please review again.

[bedevere-app]

Thanks for making the requested changes!

@ethanfurman: please review the changes made to this pull request.