[Python-Dev] Proposed schedule for 3.4.2

[Guido van Rossum]

I still prefer having a parameter on urlopen (or thereabouts) -- it feels
wrong to make it easier to change this globally than on a per-call basis,
and if you don't understand monkey-patching, it's impossible to debug if
you put the patch in the wrong place.

For the poor soul who has a script with many urlopen("https"//<whatever>")
calls, well, they probably don't mind the busywork of editing each and
every one of them.

I'm fine with giving the actual keyword parameter a scary-sounding ugly
name.

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Donald Stufft <donald at stufft.io> wrote:

>
> On Sep 8, 2014, at 6:43 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 9 Sep 2014 08:30, "Donald Stufft" <donald at stufft.io> wrote:
> >
> > If someone wants to do this, can’t they write their own 6 line function?
>
> Unfortunately not, as the domain knowledge required to know what those six
> lines should look like is significant.
>
> Keeping the old unsafe behaviour around with a more obviously dangerous
> name is much simpler than explaining to people "Here, copy this chunk of
> code you don't understand".
>
> If we were starting with a blank slate there's no way we'd offer such a
> thing, but as Jim pointed out, we do want to make it relatively easy for
> Standard Operating Environment maintainers to hack around it if necessary.
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> >
> > import ssl
> > import urllib.request
> > _real_urlopen = urllib.request.urlopen
> > def _unverified(*args, **kwargs):
> >     if not kwargs.keys() & {“context”, “cafile”, “capath”, “cadefault”}:
> >         ctx = ssl.create_default_context()
> >         ctx.verify_mode = CERT_NONE
> >         ctx.verify_hostname = False
> >         kwargs[“context”] = ctx
> >     return _real_urlopen(*args, **kwargs)
> >
> > ---
> > Donald Stufft
> > PGP: 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
> >
>
>
> Why isn’t documentation with appropriate red warnings a suitable place if
> we really must have it? That sounds like a much better solution that some
> weird function people monkeypatch. It gives them more control over things
> (maybe they have a valid certificate chain, but an invalid host name!),
> it’ll work across all Python implementations, and most importantly, it
> gives us a place where there is some long form location to be like “yea you
> really probably don’t want to be doing this” in big red letters.
>
> Overall I’m -1 on either offering the function or documenting it at all,
> but if we must do something then I think documentation is more than enough.
>
> ---
> Donald Stufft
> PGP: 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
>
>


-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140908/4e40802c/attachment.html>