On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:35:53PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi Bruce, > > Here is some bonus feedback. > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 11:08:52AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I expect a torrent of feedback. ;-) > > I have just noticed that this entry does not have the correct author > (guess who?):
Fixed. (I think I guessed right.) > <para> > Add libpq option to support channel binding when using <link > linkend="auth-password"><acronym>SCRAM</acronym></link> > authentication (Peter Eisentraut) > </para> > > I think that there should be two different entries in the release notes > for channel binding: > 1) The new connection parameter in libpq which allows to control the > channel binding name, as well as to decide if it should be disabled. > I would think that this is better placed within the section for client > interface changes. Well, I tend to put items in the first section that applies, and in this case, you are right that the API is libpq but the feature is authentication. We know we are going to need to adjust this feature, so let's see where it ends up and let's revisit it. > 2) Channel binding itself, which should be part of the authentication > section. > > <para> > Have libpq's <link > linkend="libpq-pqhost"><function>PQhost()</function></link> > always return the actual connected host (Hari Babu) > </para> > Should this be added as well in the section "Client interfaces"? Well, again, using the rules above, the PQhost item goes into the first section where it fits, and incompatibility is the first such section. There are other items in incompatibility that could be moved to lower, but again, we want the incompatibilities to all be in the same place. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
