Re: weird libpq GSSAPI comment

Greetings,

* Stephen Frost (sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net) wrote:
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> > On 2020-Jan-06, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > > I wonder if part of the confusion might be due to the synonyms we're
> > > > using here for "in use". Things seem to be "got running", "set up",
> > > > "operating", "negotiated", ... - maybe that's part of the barrier to
> > > > understanding?
> > >
> > > How about something like this?
> > >
> > > * If GSSAPI Encryption is enabled, then call pg_GSS_have_cred_cache()
> > > * which will return true if we can acquire credentials (and give us a
> > > * handle to use in conn->gcred), and then send a packet to the server
> > > * asking for GSSAPI Encryption (and skip past SSL negotiation and
> > > * regular startup below).
> >
> > WFM. (I'm not sure why you uppercase Encryption, though.)
>
> Ok, great, attached is an actual patch which I'll push soon if there
> aren't any other comments.

Pushed.

Thanks!

Stephen