Skip to content

gh-138633: indicate SSL backend requirements for SSL functions - #138656

Open
picnixz wants to merge 8 commits into
python:mainfrom
picnixz:docs/ssl/required-version-138633
Open

gh-138633: indicate SSL backend requirements for SSL functions#138656
picnixz wants to merge 8 commits into
python:mainfrom
picnixz:docs/ssl/required-version-138633

Conversation

@picnixz

@picnixzpicnixz commented Sep 8, 2025•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

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/

@bedevere-appbedevere-appBot mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2025
Open
4 tasks
@picnixzpicnixz changed the title gh-138633: indicate libssl requirements for SSL functionsgh-138633: indicate SSL backend requirements for SSL functionsSep 8, 2025
@picnixz

picnixz commented Sep 10, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@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?)

@picnixz

picnixz commented Sep 16, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AA-Turner I've removed the new directive as discussed. Please have a look for the rewording of the availability definition.

@picnixz

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view
@picnixz
picnixzforce-pushed the docs/ssl/required-version-138633 branch from 8e294a6 to df4f93bCompareSeptember 16, 2025 09:11
@picnixz

picnixz commented Sep 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Friendly ping @AA-Turner

AA-Turner
AA-Turner reviewed Sep 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment threadDoc/library/intro.rst Outdated
AA-Turner
AA-Turner requested changes Sep 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment threadDoc/tools/extensions/availability.py Outdated
Comment threadDoc/tools/extensions/availability.py Outdated
Comment threadDoc/tools/extensions/availability.py Outdated
Comment threadDoc/library/intro.rst Outdated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.

@AA-TurnerAA-TurnerSep 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we imply a default of OpenSSL here?

@picnixzpicnixzSep 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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).

@bedevere-app

bedevere-appBot commented Sep 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

When you're done making the requested changes, leave the comment: I have made the requested changes; please review again.

picnixzand others added 2 commits September 29, 2025 15:56
@picnixz@AA-Turner
Define SSL backends separately
c1ae0f6
Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>
@picnixz
improve availability wording
7c60b75
@picnixz

picnixz commented Sep 30, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

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.

@bedevere-app

bedevere-appBot commented Sep 30, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Thanks for making the requested changes!

@AA-Turner: please review the changes made to this pull request.

picnixz
picnixz commented Oct 5, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment threadDoc/library/ssl.rst
@picnixz

picnixz commented Jan 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AA-Turner friendly ping

@github-actions

github-actionsBot commented Apr 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This PR is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.

@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot added the stale Stale PR or inactive for long period of time. label Apr 29, 2026
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@gpsheadgpsheadAwaiting requested review from gpsheadgpshead is a code owner
@hugovkhugovkAwaiting requested review from hugovkhugovk is a code owner
@AA-TurnerAA-TurnerAwaiting requested review from AA-TurnerAA-Turner is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

awaiting change reviewskip newsstaleStale PR or inactive for long period of time.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@picnixz@AA-Turner@nazeerali4325-commits