| From: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |
| Date: | 2024-11-21 18:51:12 |
| Message-ID: | CAOYmi+=gxXx1a7s3805TjGKAugxLOuj6vpQZOjS0=zEcfHUyuQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 3:05 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
> Personally, I'm not even a fan of the -Dssl/--with-ssl system. I'm more
> attached to --with-openssl. But if you want to stick with that, a more
> suitable naming would be something like, say, --with-httplib=curl, which
> means, use curl for all your http needs. Because if we later add other
> functionality that can use some http, I don't think we want to enable or
> disable them all individually, or even mix different http libraries for
> different features. In practice, curl is a widely available and
> respected library, so I'd expect packagers to be just turn it all on
> without much further consideration.
Okay, I can see that. I'll work on replacing --with-builtin-oauth. Any
votes from the gallery on --with-httplib vs. --with-libcurl?
The other suggestions look good and I've added them to my personal
TODO list. Thanks again for all the feedback!
--Jacob
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2024-11-21 19:06:11 | Re: Replace current implementations in crypt() and gen_salt() to OpenSSL |
| Previous Message | Thomas Simpson | 2024-11-21 18:18:23 | circle @> box, polygon points access |