New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Explore move back to external Paramiko dependency #86

Closed
bitprophet opened this Issue Aug 19, 2011 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
1 participant
@bitprophet
Member

bitprophet commented Aug 19, 2011

Description

Paramiko, as of this ticket, has a 1.7.6 release that fixes the big SSHException problem that cropped up in 1.7.5 (which has caused us to vendorize a copy of 1.7.4.)

While we don't have time to test it before pushing out 0.9, we may want to move back to the external dependency, listing e.g. Paramiko ==1.7.4,>=1.7.6 for future Fabric releases.

A good test would be to submit patches for e.g. #85 or other Paramiko level problems (there's at least one more that was bugging me) and see whether Robey is able to slot it in fast enough for my tastes. Never going to slam someone for being busy, but if he's ALWAYS super busy and unable to even give an ETA for releases like for the 1.7.5 fiasco, we may wish to continue using and patching our internal version of Paramiko. I believe the LGPL would allow for this.


Originally submitted by Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) on 2009-11-08 at 10:39am EST

Relations

  • Related to #158: Slow disconnects at end of session
  • Related to #85: Prompts for "passphrase" instead of "password" in some situations
  • Related to #67: Prepare for packaging on PyPI, etc
  • Related to #228: PyCrypto >=2.1 has issues with pip

Closed as Done on 2010-09-05 at 11:11pm EDT

@ghost ghost assigned bitprophet Aug 19, 2011

@bitprophet

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bitprophet

bitprophet Aug 19, 2011

Member

Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:


Pressure from #158, and the fact that I think it should be easy enough for us to host a tgz of Paramiko 1.7.4 for edge case users, means I am thinking seriously of nuking our vendorized Paramiko for the 0.9.2 release.

New users are relatively highly likely to trigger #158, and a number of users bitten by that ticket have upgraded to Paramiko 1.7.6 without issue.

Furthermore, for any users who are on Python <2.6.5 and do find bugs in Paramiko 1.7.6, it's easy enough to install Paramiko 1.7.4 from a tgz, even though it's not on PyPI. (Would be nice to ask Robey to re-add it to PyPI but I'm not holding my breath.)

Will think on it a bit more but I'm thinking the Windows oriented fixes for 0.9.2, plus this, would make it a nice "packaging related" release.


on 2010-06-18 at 02:53pm EDT

Member

bitprophet commented Aug 19, 2011

Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:


Pressure from #158, and the fact that I think it should be easy enough for us to host a tgz of Paramiko 1.7.4 for edge case users, means I am thinking seriously of nuking our vendorized Paramiko for the 0.9.2 release.

New users are relatively highly likely to trigger #158, and a number of users bitten by that ticket have upgraded to Paramiko 1.7.6 without issue.

Furthermore, for any users who are on Python <2.6.5 and do find bugs in Paramiko 1.7.6, it's easy enough to install Paramiko 1.7.4 from a tgz, even though it's not on PyPI. (Would be nice to ask Robey to re-add it to PyPI but I'm not holding my breath.)

Will think on it a bit more but I'm thinking the Windows oriented fixes for 0.9.2, plus this, would make it a nice "packaging related" release.


on 2010-06-18 at 02:53pm EDT

@bitprophet

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bitprophet

bitprophet Aug 19, 2011

Member

Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:


I've removed it in an unpushed commit in 0.9, and all tests pass on 0.9; merged that into master, ditto there; tossed it onto an Ubuntu server image and that also passes tests on both suites. (Furthermore, a full exercise of my personal fabfile, using master, ran without issue.)

So it seems that it's safe to move to the external dep, which is currently 1.7.6.

The only issue right now is that pip can't seem to install newer PyCrypto releases, so new users will need to do easy_install pycrypto && pip install fabric. This stinks but I don't think it's our fault and don't see an easy way around it right now. It's also not related to Paramiko itself -- just something that has come up recently and is related to installation.


on 2010-09-05 at 10:29pm EDT

Member

bitprophet commented Aug 19, 2011

Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:


I've removed it in an unpushed commit in 0.9, and all tests pass on 0.9; merged that into master, ditto there; tossed it onto an Ubuntu server image and that also passes tests on both suites. (Furthermore, a full exercise of my personal fabfile, using master, ran without issue.)

So it seems that it's safe to move to the external dep, which is currently 1.7.6.

The only issue right now is that pip can't seem to install newer PyCrypto releases, so new users will need to do easy_install pycrypto && pip install fabric. This stinks but I don't think it's our fault and don't see an easy way around it right now. It's also not related to Paramiko itself -- just something that has come up recently and is related to installation.


on 2010-09-05 at 10:29pm EDT

@bitprophet

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bitprophet

bitprophet Aug 19, 2011

Member

Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:


Applied in changeset commit:3b32c6af3906888fa9d56e6fd88b15584ed0ccb7.


on 2010-09-05 at 10:30pm EDT

Member

bitprophet commented Aug 19, 2011

Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:


Applied in changeset commit:3b32c6af3906888fa9d56e6fd88b15584ed0ccb7.


on 2010-09-05 at 10:30pm EDT

@bitprophet

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bitprophet

bitprophet Aug 19, 2011

Member

Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:


Going to spin off the PyCrypto issue into its own ticket: #228


on 2010-09-05 at 11:11pm EDT

Member

bitprophet commented Aug 19, 2011

Jeff Forcier (bitprophet) posted:


Going to spin off the PyCrypto issue into its own ticket: #228


on 2010-09-05 at 11:11pm EDT

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment