This discussion seems to have gone stale. As far as I can read the thread, there are three lines of thought at play (in no special order):
- the API put forth in #11996 and #11997 - the API exemplified with EVP_MAC and EVP_KDF before #11996 and #11997 - the API exemplified by functions in CamelCase I'm uncertain if we mean to say that only new EVP features (sometimes called sub-APIs) should be affected by whatever we decide, or if we should make appropriate aliases for older EVP features as well (one might argue that the CamelCase functions pave a way that avoids such aliases). Cheers, Richard -- Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
