On 2020-05-30 17:49, Gregory Szorc wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 6:25 AM Yuya Nishihara <y...@tcha.org> wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2020 07:52:17 +0200, Manuel Jacob wrote:
> # HG changeset patch
> # User Manuel Jacob <m...@manueljacob.de>
> # Date 1590807553 -7200
> # Sat May 30 04:59:13 2020 +0200
> # Node ID f8ae379a8dcfebbec6cf6570d8d38fa1e3b6bcea
> # Parent fa4460229a8d1a392564d0cbe78216760154822c
> # EXP-Topic require_modern_ssl
> hgweb: avoid using `sslutil.modernssl`
>
> `sslutil.modernssl` is going to be removed. Since the point of using this
> attribute was to check the importability of the `sslutil`, a different
> attribute can be used. `sslutil.wrapserversocket` is used because it’s
anyway
> used a few lines below.
>
> diff --git a/mercurial/hgweb/server.py b/mercurial/hgweb/server.py
> --- a/mercurial/hgweb/server.py
> +++ b/mercurial/hgweb/server.py
> @@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ class _httprequesthandlerssl(_httpreques
> try:
> from .. import sslutil
>
> - sslutil.modernssl
> + sslutil.wrapserversocket
> except ImportError:
I wonder if we should still support Python builds of ssl disabled. If
we
should, setup.py condition needs to be relaxed.
What environments might not have ssl support?
Strictly speaking, it is possible to produce a Python distribution
without
ssl support. But it isn't something I've seen in years.
I sometimes compile Python interpreters (usually PyPy) with a limited
set of extension modules. However, I very rarely run Mercurial on top of
these and in these cases I can comment out that check manually.
I would be fine with leaving it as is or sending a patch relaxing it.
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
