On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:10:18 +0100
M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
The OpenSSL version used for 2.7.6 is 0.9.8y.
Upgrading to 1.0.0 or 1.0.1 will likely need a few minor tweaks, but
not cause general breakage - at least that's my experience with
the egenix-pyopenssl distribution.
For
On 25 March 2014 09:04, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
On Mar 24, 2014, at 5:38 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
While I totally agree that it would be incredibly awesome if more companies
put
dedicated time into developing and maintaining CPython I don't think pushing
all
On Mar 25, 2014, at 06:11 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
I actually agree with this (hence why I wrote the PEP in the first
place), I just became really, really, really, annoyed with certain
organisations over the course of writing the PEP drafts and that is
reflected in the tone of the latest draft.
On 23.03.2014 08:07, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Open Questions
==
* What are the risks associated with allowing OpenSSL to be updated to
new feature versions in the Windows and Mac OS X binary installers for
maintenance releases? Currently we just upgrade to the appropriate
Le 24/03/2014 10:10, M.-A. Lemburg a écrit :
On 23.03.2014 08:07, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Open Questions
==
* What are the risks associated with allowing OpenSSL to be updated to
new feature versions in the Windows and Mac OS X binary installers for
maintenance releases?
On 24.03.2014 13:33, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le 24/03/2014 10:10, M.-A. Lemburg a écrit :
On 23.03.2014 08:07, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Open Questions
==
* What are the risks associated with allowing OpenSSL to be updated to
new feature versions in the Windows and Mac OS X binary
On 24 March 2014 22:39, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
On 24.03.2014 13:33, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Under Linux (and probably OS X too), the _ssl module is linked
dynamically with OpenSSL:
$ ldd build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7-pydebug/_ssl.so
linux-vdso.so.1 = (0x7fff3f1de000)
In article
cadisq7f0cnzrfm4i8xj13j+slq63uynqkdo12czm5yeq3bf...@mail.gmail.com,
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
You also reminded me that I need to dig around for and reference Ned's
email about the status of OS X and reference that (OpenSSL upgrades
were a casualty of Apple's anti-GPL
On 24.03.2014 18:23, Ned Deily wrote:
In article
cadisq7f0cnzrfm4i8xj13j+slq63uynqkdo12czm5yeq3bf...@mail.gmail.com,
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
You also reminded me that I need to dig around for and reference Ned's
email about the status of OS X and reference that (OpenSSL
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com writes:
Maintainability
---
This policy does NOT represent a commitment by volunteer contributors to
actually backport network security related changes from the Python 3 series
to the Python 2 series. Rather, it is intended to send a clear signal
On 25 Mar 2014 04:00, Nikolaus Rath nikol...@rath.org wrote:
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com writes:
Maintainability
---
This policy does NOT represent a commitment by volunteer contributors to
actually backport network security related changes from the Python 3
series
to
On Mar 24, 2014, at 5:38 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 Mar 2014 04:00, Nikolaus Rath nikol...@rath.org wrote:
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com writes:
Maintainability
---
This policy does NOT represent a commitment by volunteer contributors to
On 3/24/2014 7:04 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Mar 24, 2014, at 5:38 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com
mailto:ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Beyond that, PEP 462 covers another way for corporate users to give
back - if they want to build massive commercial enterprises on our
software, they can
Several significant changes in this revision:
- scope narrowed to just Python 2.7 plus permission for commercial
redistributors to use the same strategy in their long term support
releases
- far more explicit that this is about inviting potential corporate
contributors to address the situation
On Mar 23, 2014, at 3:07 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Several significant changes in this revision:
- scope narrowed to just Python 2.7 plus permission for commercial
redistributors to use the same strategy in their long term support
releases
- far more explicit that this is
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
And that's just three of the highest profile open source projects that
make heavy use of Python. Given the likely existence of large amounts of
legacy code that lacks the kind of automated regression test suite needed
to
Am 23.03.14 08:07, schrieb Nick Coghlan:
Several significant changes in this revision:
- scope narrowed to just Python 2.7 plus permission for commercial
redistributors to use the same strategy in their long term support
releases
Thanks; the rationale is now much clearer, and also indicates
On 23 Mar 2014 18:42, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Am 23.03.14 08:07, schrieb Nick Coghlan:
Several significant changes in this revision:
- scope narrowed to just Python 2.7 plus permission for commercial
redistributors to use the same strategy in their long term support
On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 17:07:24 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Another more critical example is the lack of SSL hostname matching in the
Python 2 standard library - it is currently necessary to rely on a third
party library, such as ``requests`` or ``backports.ssl_match_hostname`` to
On 23 March 2014 07:07, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Advance warning: while I was able to get this revision turned around
pretty quickly, future revisions are likely to take a fair bit longer.
It was already a rather busy month before I decided to start this
discussion on top of
On Mar 23, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 17:07:24 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Another more critical example is the lack of SSL hostname matching in the
Python 2 standard library - it is currently necessary to rely on a third
21 matches
Mail list logo
