➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author debatem1
Recipients daniel.urban, debatem1, eric.araujo, exarkun, gdamjan, giampaolo.rodola, gregory.p.smith, heikki, jsamuel, loewis, mcrute, pitrou
Date 2010-06-18.06:44:20
SpamBayes Score 0.0029664885
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <AANLkTinlDUJT8op3qlN0NgolxMn_aT9HNnMcD3pM4j2J@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <4C1B0FDF.2050909@v.loewis.de>
Content 
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 2:19 AM, Martin v. Löwis <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>
> Martin v. Löwis <martin@v.loewis.de> added the comment:
>
>>>   * I'd prefer if the crypto API didn't become OpenSSL specific (like the SSL one is), which would theoretically allow switching in other crypto provider(s).
>>
>> I agree in theory, although I'm not sure how important this is likely
>> to be in practice.
>
> I always wanted to drop OpenSSL from the Windows binaries, and use MS
> CryptoAPI instead.

My familiarity with the CryptoAPI is limited, but I think doing this
for something like evpy would be possible. I also suspect that doing
it for anything that exposed much more than evpy does would grow very
quickly in complexity where it was possible at all.

Geremy Condra
History
Date User Action Args
2010-06-18 06:44:23debatem1setrecipients: + debatem1, loewis, gregory.p.smith, exarkun, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, gdamjan, heikki, eric.araujo, daniel.urban, mcrute, jsamuel
2010-06-18 06:44:21debatem1linkissue8998 messages
2010-06-18 06:44:20debatem1create