> On 14 Jan 2020, at 16:15, Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> wrote: > >> On 14 Jan 2020, at 15:49, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> >> Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> writes: >>>>> On 11 Jan 2020, at 03:49, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: >>>>> One thing I noticed when looking at it is that we now have sha2_openssl.c >>>>> and >>>>> openssl_protocol.c in src/common. For easier visual grouping of OpenSSL >>>>> functionality, it makes sense to me to rename sha2_openssl.c to >>>>> openssl_sha2.c, >>>>> but that might just be pointless churn. >> >>>> Databases like consistency, and so do I, so no issues from me to do a >>>> rename of the sha2.c file. That makes sense with the addition of the >>>> new file. >> >>> Done in the attached v3. >> >> I'm kind of down on renaming files unless there is a *really* strong >> reason for it. It makes back-patching more difficult and it makes >> it much harder to follow the git history. And, seeing that there is >> also a src/common/sha2.c, it seems to me that renaming sha2_openssl.c >> will just break consistency in a different way. >> >> Maybe the problem is you've got the new file's name backwards. >> Maybe it should be protocol_openssl.c. > > Thats a very good argument, I’ll send a v4 with protocol_openssl.c when back > at the computer.
Files renamed to match existing naming convention, the rest of the patch left unchanged. cheers ./daniel
libpq_minmaxproto_v4.patch
Description: Binary data
