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 pitrou
Recipients daniel.urban, debatem1, dmalcolm, eric.araujo, exarkun, georg.brandl, giampaolo.rodola, gregory.p.smith, heikki, jsamuel, lemburg, loewis, lorph, mcrute, pitrou, vstinner
Date 2010-10-14.12:20:37
SpamBayes Score 9.592043e-07
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1287058835.3343.5.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In-reply-to <4CB6F4FB.6000704@egenix.com>
Content
> > This sounds a bit ridiculous. Why not add the crypto routines directly
> > to the stdlib?
> 
> To make those routines available to a broader audience and to
> get more user feedback.

Sure. But it can be any standalone package, not necessarily pyOpenSSL.
Then, if we want to add them to the stdlib, we don't have to pull in the
whole pyOpenSSL package.

> I don't think we can add pyOpenSSL to Python 3.2,

Right, it's too late.

> so it's better
> to use the available time to hash out the details outside the
> stdlib. Once it's in the stdlib, changing APIs is very difficult.

Then I think the discussion about API and process should move to
python-ideas.
History
Date User Action Args
2010-10-14 12:20:39pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, lemburg, loewis, georg.brandl, gregory.p.smith, exarkun, vstinner, giampaolo.rodola, lorph, heikki, eric.araujo, debatem1, dmalcolm, daniel.urban, mcrute, jsamuel
2010-10-14 12:20:38pitroulinkissue8998 messages
2010-10-14 12:20:37pitroucreate