Re: Potentially misleading name of libpq pass phrase hook

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Potentially misleading name of libpq pass phrase hook
Date: 2020-05-16 00:21:50
Message-ID: 20638.1589588510@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 3:03 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
>> Since we haven't shipped this there is still time to rename, which IMO
>> is the right way forward. PQsslKeyPassHook_<library>_type would be one
>> option, but perhaps there are better alternatives?

> ISTM this should be renamed yeah -- and it should probably go on the open
> item lists, and with the schedule for the beta perhaps dealt with rather
> urgently?

+1. Once beta1 is out the cost to change the name goes up noticeably.
Not that we *couldn't* do it later, but it'd be better to have it be
right in beta1.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2020-05-16 01:15:47 Re: pg_stat_wal_receiver and flushedUpto/writtenUpto
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-05-16 00:16:41 Re: [PATCH] Fix pg_dump --no-tablespaces for the custom format