On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 08:32:18AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote: > FWIW, I think it is reasonable to say "This *is* a private mod_ssl > interface for the purposes of introducing some modularity within this > particular SSL/TLS implementation, and these interfaces aren't intended for > third-party modules." That's not how I coded it, but now that somebody has > actually looked I'm curious about your thoughts.
Hmmm, I think the only distinction that matters is whether it's in a header installed by "make install". I don't think we can successfully hide private APIs in public headers, modules will use them regardless of the "here be dragons" comments - or e.g. CORE_PRIVATE! Regards, Joe
