FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending |
URL:
| Home
Tools: [Download Repo ZIP]   [Original HTTPS Page]

gh-138633: indicate SSL backend requirements for SSL functions by picnixz · Pull Request #138656 · python/cpython · GitHub

  1. python
  2. cpython

Repository navigation

gh-138633: indicate SSL backend requirements for SSL functions - #138656

Open
picnixz wants to merge 8 commits into
python:mainfrom
picnixz:docs/ssl/required-version-138633
ConversationCommits (8)ChecksFiles changed
Open

gh-138633: indicate SSL backend requirements for SSL functions#138656
picnixz wants to merge 8 commits into
python:mainfrom
picnixz:docs/ssl/required-version-138633

Conversation

picnixz commented Sep 8, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

If we are going to support multiple flavors of libssl, we should also plan to ease our life in the future when we want to say "this is ok for this flavor" so I added a Sphinx extension (actually it's similar to the availability directive but I decided to have a separate directive as it's not really the same; since the code would be the same, I just made a base directive class for that)

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--138656.org.readthedocs.build/

bedevere-app Bot mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2025
Open
3 of 4 tasks
picnixz changed the title gh-138633: indicate libssl requirements for SSL functions gh-138633: indicate SSL backend requirements for SSL functions Sep 8, 2025

picnixz commented Sep 10, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@AA-Turner Do you mind reviewing this? or are you against a new extension (actually, do we encourage new Sphinx extensions or should we limit them?)

picnixz commented Sep 16, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@AA-Turner I've removed the new directive as discussed. Please have a look for the rewording of the availability definition.

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view
picnixz force-pushed the docs/ssl/required-version-138633 branch from 8e294a6 to df4f93b Compare September 16, 2025 09:11

picnixz commented Sep 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Friendly ping @AA-Turner

AA-Turner reviewed Sep 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread Doc/library/intro.rst Outdated
AA-Turner requested changes Sep 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread Doc/tools/extensions/availability.py Outdated
Comment thread Doc/tools/extensions/availability.py Outdated
Comment thread Doc/tools/extensions/availability.py Outdated
Comment thread Doc/library/intro.rst Outdated
was built. For instance, "Availability: OpenSSL >= 3.5" note means that the
feature is available if Python has been built with OpenSSL 3.5 or later,
while "Availability: not AWS-LC" note means that the feature is not available
if Python has been built with AWS-LC instead of OpenSSL.

AA-Turner Sep 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Should we imply a default of OpenSSL here?

picnixz Sep 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

I'd say "it depends". For now, we only have OpenSSL and AWS-LC that are "supported" and tested. We don't test LibreSSL or BoringSSL. In the future "not AWS-LC" may mean "everything that is libssl-like except AWS-LC". But this may be a bit annoying to actually say that "libssl-like" means. So, I don't have a preference. I think we should always assume that it should work with OpenSSL (maybe not with all its versions).

bedevere-app Bot commented Sep 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

When you're done making the requested changes, leave the comment: I have made the requested changes; please review again.

picnixz and others added 2 commits September 29, 2025 15:56
Define SSL backends separately
c1ae0f6 
Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>
improve availability wording
7c60b75

picnixz commented Sep 30, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I think I found a compromise. I tried to be as generic as possible in the introduction for the availability note, and a bit more precise in the SSL document itself.

I have made the requested changes; please review again.

bedevere-app Bot commented Sep 30, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Thanks for making the requested changes!

@AA-Turner: please review the changes made to this pull request.

bedevere-app Bot requested a review from AA-Turner September 30, 2025 10:08
picnixz commented Oct 5, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread Doc/library/ssl.rst

picnixz commented Jan 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@AA-Turner friendly ping

github-actions Bot commented Apr 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This PR is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.

github-actions Bot added the stale Stale PR or inactive for long period of time. label Apr 29, 2026
This file contains hidden or 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
Show hidden characters
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

gpshead Awaiting requested review from gpshead gpshead is a code owner
hugovk Awaiting requested review from hugovk hugovk is a code owner
AA-Turner Awaiting requested review from AA-Turner AA-Turner is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

awaiting change review skip news stale Stale PR or inactive for long period of time.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL