ssl.OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT missing

[xtkoba]

BPO	44888
Nosy	@tiran, @xtkoba
PRs	bpo-44888: Add ssl.OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT #27776

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = 'https://github.com/tiran'
closed_at = None
created_at = <Date 2021-08-11.11:35:40.075>
labels = ['expert-SSL']
title = 'ssl.OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT missing'
updated_at = <Date 2021-08-16.03:58:50.811>
user = 'https://github.com/xtkoba'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2021-08-16.03:58:50.811>
actor = 'python-dev'
assignee = 'christian.heimes'
closed = False
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['SSL']
creation = <Date 2021-08-11.11:35:40.075>
creator = 'xtkoba'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 44888
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 1.0
messages = ['399386']
nosy_count = 3.0
nosy_names = ['christian.heimes', 'python-dev', 'xtkoba']
pr_nums = ['27776']
priority = 'normal'
resolution = None
stage = 'patch review'
status = 'open'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue44888'
versions = []

Linked PRs

• gh-89051: Add ssl.OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT #93927
• [3.11] gh-89051: Add ssl.OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT (GH-93927) #100359
• [3.10] gh-89051: Add ssl.OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT (GH-93927) #100360

[xtkoba]

Please implement ssl.OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT constant that corresponds to SSL_OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT in C. This is required to make OpenSSL 3.0.0 behave like 1.1.1.

[tiran]

@graingert Do you want to backport the change to 3.11 and 3.10?

[graingert]

@graingert Do you want to backport the change to 3.11 and 3.10?

I'd like the backport in 3.10 and I hope the patch will apply automatically

[tiran]

I'd like the backport in 3.10 and I hope the patch will apply automatically

You have to manually backport the patch to 3.11 and 3.11 to adjust the versionadded field.

[graingert]

oh right so it should be versionadded: 3.10.6, 3.11 in the original PR?

[tiran]

The original PR should have 3.11 and the backport to 3.10 needs to have 3.10.7. AFAIK versionadded does only support one argument.

[graingert]

Hmm but then users reading the 3.11 docs will see the wrong versionadded

cc @hugovk

[hugovk]

So was it added in 3.11 and backported to 3.10.6?

Can it be .. versionadded:: 3.10.6 for both?

Otherwise, https://devguide.python.org/documentation/markup/?highlight=versionadded#paragraph-level-markup says of versionadded:

The first argument must be given and is the version in question. The second argument is optional and can be used to describe the details of the feature.

For example:

• .. versionadded:: 3.9 backported to 3.7 and 3.8.
  https://docs.python.org/3/library/decimal.html#decimal.HAVE_CONTEXTVAR
• .. versionadded:: 3.9 (the field exists since 3.8 but it's only used since 3.9)
  https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/typeobj.html#c.PyTypeObject.tp_vectorcall

[hugovk]

I've merged #93927 with:

• .. versionadded:: 3.12 in 3.12/main

And let's go for:

• .. versionadded:: 3.10.10 in 3.10
• .. versionadded:: 3.11.2 in 3.11

@graingert Please could you make the 3.10 and 3.11 backport PRs?

[hugovk]

Actually, let's try using Miss Islington and then modify those PRs.

[hugovk]

Miss Islington didn't like the merge conflicts, back to the command line. Please see PRs #100359 and #100360.

[hugovk]

I closed the backports, as we don't normally backport new features to bugfix branches.

https://devguide.python.org/versions/

This will be in the next 3.12.0 alpha 4, due on 2023-01-09.