Re: Removal of support for OpenSSL 0.9.8 and 1.0.0
Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 09:22:47AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > FWIW, I'm not sure I see why there's a connection between moving up > the minimum Python version and minimum OpenSSL version. Nobody is > installing bleeding-edge Postgres on RHEL5, not even me ;-), so I > don't especially buy Peter's line of reasoning. It seems to me that the line of reasoning was to consider RHEL5 in the garbage for all our dependencies, in a consistent way. > I'm perfectly okay with doing both things in HEAD, I just don't > see that doing one is an argument for or against doing the other. Yes, right. That would be the case if we had direct dependencies between both, but that has never been the case AFAIK. -- Michael
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEG72nH6vTowiyblFKnvQgOdbyQH0FAl4SmJ8ACgkQnvQgOdby QH1S6RAAi4+175gx3+JSrWuVeuhJVkb+3GTMMnCqId4aC86EoSAv8f3rpGnmRQPN hp/g3xb4TpaVhh2jipOzCnXr3dw7G5GW+j+A7ZtlmFhiYrUk8iVg/eV6K/t+TvuI mQOtu90lB+9QgckW3vA4FwNoRQaSpX3KXKlaqqSROOzAiZSsXQEvNLdcxZZUVtFR 4G5zHFuFScfFZmTlX4USgDM9mV9sxjs7Ht8uOLiqz+bYURX5ZvClkj9Fs3Z6g/W5 GwGUHnSKqOfZ/XfEBickFeA8ARnK//Vo3zEkNevRyf7e1ZZI5aXmVe9VGu4hKTmD t0zyMCDsxxmDWFYCwGz0Zlj9o4TyCOeX6AbDdkIH3PFcu/0yD0sM2fn8urkHgUYL amCG6BHstZa5cSpRaUCLJEfZYUWJImX/knzgKSxQUfmWB5QB+sxwWvcrdHUC6FUg 42T9gZvjRb8mokAoIFz7L/9G7n+1d939+EFM9PutJRqfazK1s34KBNNbvHkdEkGE thYBc8D7+CBWBX4oRgzvRt+PQO9XbCMdBgPkZStXhPIB/PvOwVwnC3WN8B+zOOlS IifAkglDUmxGXsrElgs/+dUYyS+Q75G82F5yrFq5MrTQ5h6U2BlL0tJ1mBOOiU00 2bOuPUS6ol6VsrEcDVtx+c8lQTFBhrtl8U0onW5HU8WkcNbsEaU= =HB0g -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----