Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 20:19:25 -0400
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
 Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>,
 PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: PQgetssl() and alternative SSL implementations
Message-ID: <20140821001925.GH17822@momjian.us>
References: <53F1E989.8020609@vmware.com>
 <CA+TgmoZDJ6CKiuBMqNk3iS7LQ9GZuzS7RTYSOvRu8kJjRKWLng@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABUevExpTZpMAMvr=BkeO5-XG_zgZP=TKdyCCpgEpYc0Htjr8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <10419.1408475397@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CABUevEy03OvP3N3wBRVP7BcmwcHf=Qi6Crb2MHo4dVmG--ZnVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+TgmoaKHd+HW8kOgzovdSTWhauEsV0qeRsxPLpEZfSNDiSP=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140819194717.GM16422@tamriel.snowman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140819194717.GM16422@tamriel.snowman.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 03:47:17PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
> > BTW, if we're beating on libpq, I wonder if we shouldn't consider
> > bumping the soversion at some point.  I mean, I know that we
> > technically don't need to do that if we're only *adding* functions and
> > not changing any of the existing stuff in backward-incompatible ways,
> > but we might *want* to make some backward-incompatible changes at some
> > point, and I think there's a decent argument that any patch in this
> > are is already doing that at least to PQgetSSL().  Maybe this would be
> > a good time to think if there's anything else we want to do that
> > would, either by itself or in combination, justify a bump.
> 
> I'm not a big fan of doing it for this specific item, though it's
> technically an API breakage (which means we should actually have
> libpq2-dev packages, make everything that build-deps on libpq-dev
> update to build-dep on libpq2-dev, have libpq6, etc..).  If there are
> other backwards-incompatible things we wish to do, then I agree that
> it'd be good to do them all at the same time (perhaps in conjunction
> with 10.0...).  This is the part where I wish we had been keeping an
> updated list of things we want to change (like on the wiki..).

We have, called "Wire Protocol Changes":

	https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo

Unfortunately, the subsection link doesn't work on Firefox.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers