Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Gustafsson
Subject Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility
Date
Msg-id 32C71A5F-E335-41E7-BBB0-3D74147C3DB6@yesql.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
> On 23 Sep 2020, at 10:19, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 02:01:18PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Another option would be to follow OpenSSL's deprecations and mark these ciphers
>> as deprecated such that we can remove them in case they indeed get removed from
>> libcypto.  That would give users a heads-up that they should have a migration
>> plan for if that time comes.
>
> Does that mean a deprecation note in the docs as well as a WARNING
> when attempting to use those ciphers in pgcryto with the version of
> OpenSSL marking such ciphers as deprecated?  I would assume that we
> should do both, rather than only one of them to bring more visibility
> to the user.

We generally don't issue WARNINGs for deprecated functionality do we?  The only
one I can see is for GLOBAL TEMPORARY in temp table creation.  The relevant
errcode ERRCODE_WARNING_DEPRECATED_FEATURE is also not used anywhere.

I'd expect it to just be a note in the documentation, with a prominent
placement in the release notes, if we decide to do something like this.

cheers ./daniel


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility
Next
From: Greg Nancarrow
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel INSERT (INTO ... SELECT ...)