On 4/2/18 02:51, Michael Paquier wrote: > It seems to me that this routine should be logically put into > be-secure-common.c so as future SSL implementations can use it. This > makes the code more consistent with the frontend refactoring that has > happened in f75a959. I would not have bothered about this refactoring > if be-secure-openssl.c did not exist yet, but as it does I think that we > should bite the bullet, and do that for v11 so as a good base is in > place for the future.
committed -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
