Issue #21258 has been updated by getajobmike (Mike Perham). CGI may be an "old" protocol but that maturity brings stability. It means I don't need to run an app server process (like puma) at all. I don't need to worry about open ports, memory leaks, resource leaks, connection pooling, etc. It's extremely reliable and requires zero maintenance from me. I have no problem pulling in the gem. If you need someone to help maintain it, I would be happy to help. ---------------------------------------- Feature #21258: Retire CGI library from Ruby 3.5 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21258#change-113149 * Author: hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA) * Status: Assigned * Assignee: hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA) ---------------------------------------- I would like to retire CGI library from Ruby 3.5.0 release. It means CGI is not promoted bundled gems. The users need to run `gem install cgi` after Ruby 3.5 if they want to use CGI library. ## Background I handled two CVEs related CGI library at https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2025/02/26/security-advisories/ We shouldn't spend our time to maintain CGI library in the future because CGI is old protocol. In fact, Perl 5.22.0 removed CGI.pm at 2015, Python 3.13 also removed cgi at Nov 2024. ## Problem CGI is not using widely today. But `cgi/escape` is core feature in Ruby ecosystem. `erb`, `net-http` and `bundler` depend `CGI.escape`/`CGI.unescape`. And `CGI.escapeHTML`, `CGI.escapeURIComponent` are used at that libraries. ## Solution 1. We keep only `cgi/escape` feature in Ruby. The current CGI library is removed and depend `cgi-util` gem. 2. We migrate `cgi/escape` to other class/module. The current CGI library and `cgi/escape` are removed. 3. 2 + We provide `cgi-util` gem for migration with deprecated warning at Ruby 3.5. In next year, we will remove `cgi-util` gem. The new class/module location is diffcult. I discussed that with some Ruby core member. * `URI.escape/unescape`: `URI.escape` is migrated to `URI::RFC2396_PARSER.escape` at Ruby 3.4. The new `URI.escape` is confusing name with historical reason. * `URI::Util.escape`: It seems okay...? I think URI or related name are good place for that because other language provide that under the url libraries: Python: ``` import urllib.parse urllib.parse.quote() ``` Java: ``` import java.net.URLEncoder; URLEncoder.encode() ``` Go: ``` import "net/url" url.QueryEscape() ``` ## Migration plan If Idea 2 is accepted and decide new location, We provide dummy module and method for `cgi/escape`. That dummy module call new method and warn about deprecating `cgi/escape`. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/