Roumen in https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/10977#issuecomment-584818517 <https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/10977#issuecomment-584818517> Dmitry in https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/11082#issuecomment-585603911 <https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/11082#issuecomment-585603911> And a further one via private email.
Pauli -- Dr Paul Dale | Distinguished Architect | Cryptographic Foundations Phone +61 7 3031 7217 Oracle Australia > On 14 Feb 2020, at 7:37 pm, Matt Caswell <m...@openssl.org> wrote: > > > > On 14/02/2020 02:30, Dr Paul Dale wrote: >> There is some pushback against the deprecations going on in various PRs. > > I've not followed all of the PRs. Can you point at some specific > comments you've received pushing back on this? > > Matt > > >> >> The plan has always been to deprecate engines in 3.0 and removing >> support for them 5+ years later. Originally, the path was to have >> included an engine provider that could load engines and make them appear >> to be a provider. After a fair amount of investigation, this was deemed >> to be too difficult in the 3.0 time frame. >> >> Do we still want to deprecate engines in 3.0? >> Should we defer until 4.0 instead? >> >> >> The main benefits seem to boil down to continuing to support existing >> engines vs removing the legacy code paths and switching to the provider >> model. >> >> >> Pauli >> -- >> Dr Paul Dale | Distinguished Architect | Cryptographic Foundations >> Phone +61 7 3031 7217 >> Oracle Australia >>
