Re: PQinitSSL broken in some use casesf

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> PQinitSSL is *broken*. It's always been broken. Since it already
>>>> takes a parameter, I say add a special switch...the backwards
>>>> compatibility danger doesn't seem too bad.
>>> Add a switch to what? I get very nervous for our Windows users when
>>> people start talking about changing the libpq API (for those that
>>> don't know, Windows doesn't have DLL versioning like Unix - so any
>>> non-backwards compatible API change really needs a corresponding
>>> filename change to avoid pain and suffering).
>>
>> PQinitSSL(SSL_ONLY) or something, where the constant is carefully
>> chosen to not be accidentally passed in by older libpq users.
>
> So how are you planinng to deal with it when your application passes
> that to a version of libpq that doesn't support it?

well, either nothing, which is no worse off than we are now, or
backpatch the fix. probably nothing :-)

merlin