[Python-Dev] RFC: Backport ssl.MemoryBIO and ssl.SSLObject to Python 2.7
solipsis at pitrou.net
Thu Jun 1 09:53:19 EDT 2017
On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:37:55 +0100
Cory Benfield <cory at lukasa.co.uk> wrote:
> > And indeed it doesn't. Unless the target user base for pip is widely
> > different than Python's, it shouldn't cause you any problems either.
> Maybe not now, but I think it’s fair to say that it did, right?
Until Python 3.2 and perhaps 3.3, yes. Since 3.4, definitely not. For
example asyncio quickly grew a sizable community around it, even though
it had established Python 2-compatible competitors.
> > Then the PEP is really wrong or misleading in the way it states its own
> > motivations.
> How so?
In the sentence "There are plans afoot to look at moving Requests to a
more event-loop-y model, and doing so basically mandates a MemoryBIO",
and also in the general feeling it gives that the backport is motivated
by security reasons primarily.
I understand that some users would like more features in Python 2.7.
That has been the case since it was decided that feature development in
the 2.x line would end in favour of Python 3 development. But our
maintenance policy has been and is to develop new features on Python 3
(which some people have described as a "carrot" for migrating, which is
More information about the Python-Dev