Placing everything under EVP is reasonable in my view. It is just a prefix and it really has no meaning these days as it became nothing more than a common prefix to use.
I don't see any significant benefit in renaming at this point - even for RAND. Tim. On Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 1:56 am Matt Caswell, <m...@openssl.org> wrote: > > > On 23/07/2020 16:52, Richard Levitte wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:18:10 +0200, > > Dr Paul Dale wrote: > >> There has been a suggestion to rename EVP_RAND to OSSL_RAND. This > seems reasonable. Would it > >> also make sense to rename the other new APIs similarly. > >> More specifically, EVP_MAC and EVP_KDF to OSSL_MAC and OSSL_KDF > respectively? > > > > This is a good question... > > > > Historically speaking, even though EVP_MAC and EVP_KDF are indeed new > > APIs, they have a previous history of EVP APIs, through EVP_PKEY. The > > impact of relocating them outside of the EVP "family" may be small, > > but still, history gives me pause. > > > > RAND doesn't carry the same sort of history, which makes it much > > easier for me to think "just do it and get it over with"... > > I have the same pause - so I'm thinking just RAND for now. > > Matt > >
