05.03.2011 12:48, Tomer Filiba kirjoitti:
i decided to port tlslite to python 2.6, 2.7, 3.1, and 3.2.
the library is public domain, so there's nothing wrong with that.
http://github.com/tomerfiliba/tlslite
note that i am NOT going to develop the library -- only port it for
newer versions of python.
i cannot fix and any bugs, add features, etc. -- encryption is not my
domain.
Wouldn't it be more productive to use the standard library's SSL module
instead?
Declaring the "ssl" and "backports.ssl_match_hostname" distributions
from PyPI as dependencies on Python < 2.6 and < 3.2 respectively to
provide backwards compatibility would let you drop those depencies along
with support for those Python versions at some point in the future.
Choosing to do this instead of breathing life into a dead third party
TLS library would seem the appropriate action to me.
-tomer
An NCO and a Gentleman
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 01:13, Tomer Filiba <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thanks, everyone.
I published a new blog post about the latest changes:
http://rpyc.wikidot.com/blog:20110302
I'll try to blog more, to keep everyone informed on the
development process.
-tomer
An NCO and a Gentleman
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 22:07, Fruch <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Way to go Tomer,
I sure would be nice to see RPyC back on development,
I'm actually gonna try using it in
our embedded systems for running tests.
maybe such things could help with the PR.
I'm ready to pitch in, when help is needed.
Mainly documention and testing (which are my traits)
Fruch
