[Python-Dev] Withdraw PEP 546? Backport ssl.MemoryBIO and ssl.SSLObject to Python 2.7
solipsis at pitrou.net
Fri Jun 1 04:47:21 EDT 2018
+1 for withdrawing it. It's much too late in the 2.7 maintenance
schedule to start bothering with such a large and perilous backport.
On Wed, 30 May 2018 16:28:22 +0200
Victor Stinner <vstinner at redhat.com> wrote:
> tl; dr I will withdraw the PEP 546 in one week if noboy shows up to
> finish the implementation.
> Last year,I wrote the PEP 546 with Cory Benfield:
> "Backport ssl.MemoryBIO and ssl.SSLObject to Python 2.7"
> The plan was to get a Python 2.7 implementation of Cory's PEP 543:
> "A Unified TLS API for Python"
> Sadly, it seems like Cory is no longer available to work on the projec
> (PEP 543 is still a draft)t.
> The PEP 546 is implemented:
> Well, I closed it, but you can still get it as a patch with:
> But tests fail on Travis CI whereas I'm unable to reproduce the issue
> on my laptop (on Fedora). The failure seems to depend on the version
> of OpenSSL. Christian Heimes has a "multissl" tool which automates
> tests on multiple OpenSSL versions, but I failed to find time to try
> this tool.
> Time flies and one year later, the PR of the PEP 546 is still not
> merged, tests are still failing.
> One month ago, when 2.7.15 has been released, Benjamin Peterson,
> Python 2.7 release manager, simply proposed:
> "The lack of movement for a year makes me wonder if PEP 546 should be
> moved to Withdrawn status."
> Since again, I failed to find time to look at the test_ssl failure, I
> plan to withdraw the PEP next week if nobody shows up :-( Sorry Python
> Does anyone would benefit of MemoryBIO in Python 2.7? Twisted,
> asyncio, trio, urllib3, anyone else? If yes, who is volunteer to
> finish the MemoryBIO backport (and maintain it)?
More information about the Python-Dev