[Python-Dev] PEP 466: Proposed policy change for handling network security enhancements (original) (raw)

MRAB python at mrabarnett.plus.com
Tue Mar 25 03:25:45 CET 2014

On 2014-03-25 01:29, Ben Darnell wrote:

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 4:44 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com_ _<mailto:ncoghlan at gmail.com>> wrote:

On 24 Mar 2014 15:25, "Chris Angelico" <rosuav at gmail.com_ _<mailto:rosuav at gmail.com>> wrote: > As has already been pointed out, this can already happen, but in an > ad-hoc way. Making it official or semi-official would mean that a > script written for Debian's "Python 2.7.10" would run on Red Hat's > "Python 2.7.10", which would surely be an advantage. And having it break on the official Windows and Mac OS X binaries would benefit end users, how? The position I am coming to is that the "enhanced security" release should be the default one that we publish binary installers for, but we should also ensure that downstream redistributors can easily do "Python 2.7 with legacy SSL" releases if they so choose. I'm happier forcing end users to rely on a redistributor to opt in to a lower security option than I am to knowingly publish too many additional releases with network security infrastructure that is (at best) rapidly approaching its use by date. I am strongly against allowing downstream distributors that choice. Unless the security-enhanced variant of Python 2.7 quickly and completely overtakes all previous versions, we will be creating a compatibility problem between the two variants of Python 2.7. I believe that the changes motivating this PEP can be made with minimal backwards-incompatibility risk and (if the PEP is accepted) we should use all the leverage at our disposal to drive adoption. The risk is not backwards incompatibility, it is ambiguity of what Python 2.7 means. If changes under this PEP would result in any distributors rationally remaining at Python 2.7.6, then the result of any such changes should be labelled Python 2.8. I think that calling it Python 2.8 would be a bad idea for the reasons that have already been stated.

Perhaps it should just be called Python 2.7 Enhanced Security ("Python 2.7 ES").

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list