Update on KIO & KSSL

[Thiago Macieira]

George Staikos wrote:
>On 4-Sep-07, at 2:19 PM, Allen Winter wrote:
>>> The best I can do is QSslSocket. So, if someone thinks QSslSocket is
>>> inadequate, do something better, now.
>>
>> I don't know anything about this topic.
>> What would a new KSSL class provide that the QSslFoo classes don't?
>> Would be be better off simply porting our apps to use QSslFoo
>> instead of KSSL?
>>
>> Thiago, I guess I'm looking for a mini-design description of a new
>> KSSL.
>
>   Seamless KIO integration and support for the ugly logic required
>to properly validate certificates and return error messages,
>especially in an asynchronous multi-process environment would be a
>good start to answering this.  I would then continue with integration
>with the KDE built-in policy mechanisms.  There is a lot there that
>QSsl doesn't yet provide, and a very long history of many bug fixes
>to go with it.  Also considering that QSsl has stability and site
>compatibility issues last I checked, I think we would see some
>serious regressions.

Not to mention that QSslSocket provides too many methods. There are a 
couple that a KDE developer should NEVER call, because that would change 
the KDE-wide policy.

-- 
  Thiago Macieira  -  thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
    PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
    E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20070904/a988805a/attachment.sig>