[PATCH] ui: optionally quiesce ssl verification warnings

[Steven Stallion]

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-04-09 at 12:22 -0700, Steven Stallion wrote:
>> Gotcha, I'll revert that bit. As for the option, I'm at a loss for
>> something that conveys both issues - the release being too old and the
>> fact we are quiescing cert verification. Should report_unverified
>> stand? Would report_tooold be better? I'd almost rather keep
>> report_unverified and then update the documentation to state that it
>> only affects older versions of Python (along with any other warnings
>> that folks may want).
>
> I suspect Plan 9 users are self-selected to be smarter and more
> detail-oriented than the average developer, who is willfully blind to
> both the subtleties of error messages and docs.
>
> If there's any chance that a sloppy reading of the option description
> can result in someone thinking it might silence their pesky SSL error
> messages, we'll get thousands of people reporting that it doesn't work.
> So both the option name and the description need to be unambiguously
> about disabling the "too old" warnings.
>
> Of course, "report_tooold" is its own sort of horror: what mnemonic
> tells you if/where to use the "_"? A while ago, I set down the rule on
> option naming:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/6zc57jfwnpgpffgq

I was attempting to match report_untrusted, but I agree - underscores
are evil :) How about reportoldssl?

Steve