> On 14 Jan 2020, at 15:49, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> writes: >>>> On 11 Jan 2020, at 03:49, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: >>>> One thing I noticed when looking at it is that we now have sha2_openssl.c >>>> and >>>> openssl_protocol.c in src/common. For easier visual grouping of OpenSSL >>>> functionality, it makes sense to me to rename sha2_openssl.c to >>>> openssl_sha2.c, >>>> but that might just be pointless churn. > >>> Databases like consistency, and so do I, so no issues from me to do a >>> rename of the sha2.c file. That makes sense with the addition of the >>> new file. > >> Done in the attached v3. > > I'm kind of down on renaming files unless there is a *really* strong > reason for it. It makes back-patching more difficult and it makes > it much harder to follow the git history. And, seeing that there is > also a src/common/sha2.c, it seems to me that renaming sha2_openssl.c > will just break consistency in a different way. > > Maybe the problem is you've got the new file's name backwards. > Maybe it should be protocol_openssl.c.
Thats a very good argument, I’ll send a v4 with protocol_openssl.c when back at the computer. cheers ./daniel
