Message117078
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Marc-Andre Lemburg
<report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>
> Marc-Andre Lemburg <mal@egenix.com> added the comment:
>
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>
>> Antoine Pitrou <pitrou@free.fr> added the comment:
>>
>>> pyOpenSSL is stable, in production use and
>>> has a decent API. The ssl module is good enough for HTTPS client
>>> use. pyOpenSSL provides a robust server side implementation with
>>> all the required certificate and context handling needed for this.
>>>
>>> We could tell people to use the ssl module for clients and
>>> pyOpenSSL for the server side and perhaps integrate the OpenSSL
>>> package into the ssl namespace.
>>
>> In this case, this should be decided early, so that I know if I should
>> continue caring about the ssl module or not. I'm not interested in
>> maintaining potentially obsolete code.
>
> I'll ask Jean-Paul and AB Strakt if they are up to contributing
> the pyOpenSSL code to the Python stdlib based on a contributor
> agreement. This would enable us to relicense the code undert
> the PSF license even if the original code's license is not
> changed.
>
> Once that's a done deal, we can then consider moving in the above
> direction.
I'm not sure I understand the relevance of pyopenssl here- it's pretty
clearly focused on SSL/TLS rather than on crypto. Maybe someone can
clarify?
Geremy Condra |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-09-21 16:07:48 | debatem1 | set | recipients:
+ debatem1, lemburg, loewis, georg.brandl, gregory.p.smith, exarkun, pitrou, vstinner, giampaolo.rodola, lorph, heikki, eric.araujo, dmalcolm, daniel.urban, mcrute, jsamuel |
2010-09-21 16:07:46 | debatem1 | link | issue8998 messages |
2010-09-21 16:07:44 | debatem1 | create | |
|