On 25 March 2014 13:47, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote: > It's not like we're going to just be giving the PEP to vendors as a spec and > leaving them to it - it's largely an invitation to participate more directly > upstream to help resolve a particularly thorny problem, not a Statement of > Work :) :-) I don't really know the APIs involved, but AIUI one of the 3.4 enhancements is exposing the SSLContext. Is the code to do this compatible with the version of OpenSSL bundled with Python 2.7 on Windows? If not, suppose that Red Hat provide resources that work on backporting the code, but they don't have Windows experts so no-one deals with integrating the new OpenSSL into the Windows binaries. Would the backport be blocked until someone is found to do the Windows work? This "I've written a patch but it hasn't been applied" is the type of scenario that puts people off contributing. If it's likely to happen, I think Red Hat have a right to know that in advance. And I don't know that it's something they would appreciate without python-dev pointing it out. If we're reasonably sure (not necessarily certain, there's always grey areas) that this isn't going to be an issue, then that's also fine. We can simply say that. That's all I'm saying. Not trying to require anything of contributors, just trying to be open and explicit about the criteria that will apply to accepting contributions. Paul.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4