* Joshua D. Drake (jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com) wrote:
> > 4) GNUTLS development seems more active? OpenSSL has been in a frozen/mature
> > state for a while. I don't understand why OpenSSL is still labelled as
> > 0.9.x, which might indicate alpha quality, under heavy development.
> > I don't find the reasons too compelling - but they are points to
> > consider.
> 5) GNUTLS does not run well under all of our supported platforms.
While I don't disagree about that, I would like to reiterate that I
wouldn't advocate or even suggest dropping OpenSSL support or removing
OpenSSL as the default.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jim C. Nasby||Date: 2006-12-29 20:28:32|
|Subject: Re: Load distributed checkpoint|
|Previous:||From: Roman Kononov||Date: 2006-12-29 19:54:41|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #2846: inconsistent and confusing|