We don't do that before bumping the minimum Java version ... On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 at 10:26, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Maybe post this on the user's ML just in case? > > Gary > > On Wed, Nov 8, 2023, 8:13 PM Alex Remily <alex.rem...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Wed, Nov 8, 2023, 7:24 PM sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I would really like to drop support for the oldest versions of SSL, i.e. > > > 1.0.x > > > These are seriously out of date. > > > Can we even test them properly? > > > > > > Unless I hear otherwise, I propose to remove the code next week. > > > > > > Sebb > > > On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 at 14:33, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 at 12:31, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > I am OK with dropping support for versions below 1.1.1 but it does > > not > > > > > seem crucial. > > > > > > > > > > I would prefer we do a release for this before we do anything more > > > toward 3.x. > > > > > > > > Not sure I understand what you mean here. > > > > > > > > Do you mean we should do a release purely to drop support for versions > > > > below 1.1? > > > > Or something else? > > > > > > > > Note I am not suggesting dropping support for 1.1.0 yet, but for > > > > versions before that, i.e. 1.0.x. > > > > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 8:49 PM Alex Remily <alex.rem...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Good question. I've asked it myself. I've been planning on doing > > an > > > > > > upgrade to support OpenSSL 3.X.+ that maintains support for 1.1.X. > > > That > > > > > > said, it's been at least a year and I haven't gotten around to it, > > > and I'm > > > > > > not firmly committed to the idea of maintaining backwards > > > compatibility. I > > > > > > think that if we're going to break backwards compatibility with > > older > > > > > > versions, the upgrade to 3.X would probably be a good time to do > > > it. From > > > > > > what little I've read on the subject, the move from 1.1.1 to 3.X > > is a > > > > > > significant change. In short, I would be in favor of dropping > > legacy > > > > > > OpenSSL support in the next commons crypto release. > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 9:15 AM sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is quite a lot of Crypto code that depends on the check: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if (dlsym_OpenSSL_version_num() < VERSION_1_1_X) > > > > > > > where > > > > > > > VERSION_1_1_X = 0x10100000; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dropping such support would simplify the code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there any need to continue to support such old versions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sebb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
