Greetings, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 8:28 AM Peter Eisentraut > > <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> I have decided that I don't want to pursue this patch anymore. It has > >> served its purpose having allowed us to refine the SSL library > >> abstractions so that alternative implementations such as macOS Secure > >> Transport can go ahead. But officially supporting GnuTLS as an > >> alternative to OpenSSL doesn't seem to have any practical advantages, so > >> I don't foresee this getting committed into PostgreSQL core. > > > Hmm, I find that a bit disappointing. I'm not in a position to take up > > the patch right now, unfortunately. > > Yeah, I was disappointed too. OpenSSL has had a squirrelly enough track > record that it'd be nice not to be totally dependent on it. But, like > both of you, I'm not quite motivated enough to take up the patch myself.
I'm also pretty disappointed by this, although admittedly I think my interest would be more in adding libNSS support than GnuTLS, but I had viewed this as a good stepping stone to get there. Perhaps it still can be though. Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
