On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 01:33:00PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > I don't think it is fair to be criticizing OpenSSL for its mediocre > > documentation when the alternative being considered, NSS, has no public > > documentation. Can the source-code-defined NSS documentation be > > considered better than the mediocre OpenSSL public documentation? > > I mean, I think it's fair to say that my experiences with trying to > use the OpenSSL documentation have been poor. Admittedly it's been a > few years now so maybe it's gotten better, but my experience was what > it was. In one case, the function I needed wasn't documented at all, > and I had to read the C code, which was weirdly-formatted and had no > comments. That wasn't fun, and knowing that NSS could be an even worse > experience doesn't retroactively turn that into a good one.
Oh, yeah, the OpenSSL documentation is verifiably mediocre. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.