gh-138633: indicate SSL backend requirements for SSL functions #138656
Conversation
picnixz
changed the title
|
@AA-Turner Do you mind reviewing this? or are you against a new extension (actually, do we encourage new Sphinx extensions or should we limit them?) |
This reverts commit 6df1740.
|
@AA-Turner I've removed the new directive as discussed. Please have a look for the rewording of the availability definition. |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
picnixz
force-pushed
the
docs/ssl/required-version-138633
branch
from
8e294a6 to
df4f93b
Compare
|
Friendly ping @AA-Turner |
Doc/library/intro.rst
Outdated
| was built. For instance, "Availability: OpenSSL >= 3.5" note means that the | ||
| feature is available if Python has been built with OpenSSL 3.5 or later, | ||
| while "Availability: not AWS-LC" note means that the feature is not available | ||
| if Python has been built with AWS-LC instead of OpenSSL. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we imply a default of OpenSSL here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd say "it depends". For now, we only have OpenSSL and AWS-LC that are "supported" and tested. We don't test LibreSSL or BoringSSL. In the future "not AWS-LC" may mean "everything that is libssl-like except AWS-LC". But this may be a bit annoying to actually say that "libssl-like" means. So, I don't have a preference. I think we should always assume that it should work with OpenSSL (maybe not with all its versions).
|
When you're done making the requested changes, leave the comment: |
Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>
|
I think I found a compromise. I tried to be as generic as possible in the introduction for the availability note, and a bit more precise in the SSL document itself. I have made the requested changes; please review again. |
|
Thanks for making the requested changes! @AA-Turner: please review the changes made to this pull request. |
If we are going to support multiple flavors of libssl, we should also plan to ease our life in the future when we want to say "this is ok for this flavor" so I added a Sphinx extension (actually it's similar to the availability directive but I decided to have a separate directive as it's not really the same; since the code would be the same, I just made a base directive class for that)
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--138656.org.readthedocs.build/