| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: sha1, sha2 functions into core? |
| Date: | 2012-08-20 20:33:14 |
| Message-ID: | 50329F0A.7060005@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/20/2012 04:26 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 08/20/2012 01:21 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I don't think US export regulations are the only issue. Some other
>>> countries (mostly the usual suspects) forbid the use of crypto
>>> software.
>>> If we build more crypto functions into the core we make it harder to
>>> use
>>> Postgres legally in those places.
>
> I fail to see how that is our problem. We shouldn't make the software
> less useful because of those places.
>
>
But there is absolutely no evidence that we are making it less useful.
Postgres is designed top be extensible and we've just enhanced that.
pgcrypto makes use of that. If we cen leverage that to make Postgres
available to more people then why would we not do so?
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-08-20 20:46:45 | Re: "CLUSTER VERBOSE" tab completion |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-08-20 20:32:26 | Re: Tab completion for DROP CONSTRAINT |