Re: PQinitSSL broken in some use casesf

On 30 mar 2009, at 17.24, Andrew Chernow <ac@esilo.com> wrote:

> Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, unless someone objects I'd like to make the name of that  
>> function
>> PQinitSecurity.
>
> Agreed.  Although, both PQinitSecure and PQinitSecurity are very  
> general names.  "Security" can mean a lot of things.  Maybe the name  
> should be more particular, like PQinitOpenSSL.  I think its okay to  
> reference the openssl project name being how this function is  
> designed to work with openssl's library split.
>
+1

It's quite likely that well want to support another ssl library in the  
future. At least likely enough that any api we define should take it  
into consideration.

/Magnus