Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 3/4/18 17:15, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Do I think this patch is realistic to target for v11? Well. Given where we
>> are in the cycle, I don’t think any new TLS implementation going in is
>> realistic at this point since none of the proposed ones have had enough tyre
>> kicking done. That might change should there be lots of interest and work
>> started soon, but as has been discussed elsewhere recently the project has
>> limited resources. I have time to work on this, and support reviewers of it,
>> but that’s only piece of the puzzle.
> I think it would be best if both this patch and the GnuTLS patch are
> moved to the next CF and are attacked early in the PG12 cycle.
+1. I think it's fairly important that those two get reviewed/committed
in the same cycle, in case we need to adjust the relevant APIs. It
seems unlikely that we can muster the effort to get both done for v11.
regards, tom lane