On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 03:11:10PM -0500, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > To revitalize an old thread (quoted below but summarized here), some > applications may desire source-code compatibility between the 1.0.2 API > and the 1.1.0 API. It seems like the sense of the team is that such > accessor functions (or macros) should not be committed into the official > 1.0.2 tree, but that the community could maintain an external > compatibility shim. Is that correct? > > Does anyone already have such a compatibility header, or thoughts about > where it should/could reside?
I put a bunch I've used before on the wiki, which might not be ideal. Kurt -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
