| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] GnuTLS support |
| Date: | 2018-01-30 03:36:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20180130033628.GC27287@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 07:39:33PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I think most users actually still think about the whole topic as "SSL",
> and the leading library is called "OpenSSL", so I think we're fine.
Yes, that's my impression on the matter as well. While renaming the
client-side parameters sounds not really plausible, the server-side
parameters could be renamed with an implementation-related prefix if
another implementation than OpenSSL is used. Until that happens, any
server-side renaming does not justify the breakage in my opinion.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-01-30 03:41:53 | Re: [HACKERS] GnuTLS support |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-01-30 03:33:03 | Re: [HACKERS] GnuTLS support |