Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jorton@redhat.com designates
 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 13:03:37 +0100
From: Joe Orton <jorton@redhat.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mod_ssl APIs to allow implementation of Certificate
 Transparency as a separate mod
Message-ID: <20140414120337.GA11816@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
References: 
 <CAKUrXK4r=e2AsVwafMdU2ck57eAeH-30jLZ4ftaa4BnA3e-aPA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKUrXK4r=e2AsVwafMdU2ck57eAeH-30jLZ4ftaa4BnA3e-aPA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Organization: Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No.
 03798903
  Directors: Michael Cunningham (US), Paul Hickey (Ireland), Matt Parson (US),
 Charles Peters (US)

On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 09:00:08AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> So...  Concerns?  Suggestions?  Etc.?  Speak up, or forever* ask me to fix
> it after committing ;)  (*Let's not be ridiculous though)

Interesting stuff!

I do think it is preferable to keep mod_ssl.h toolkit-agnostic.  Because 
the API you are adding is not indended to be "private", I'd suggest 
mod_ssl_openssl.h or something like that instead.

Regards, Joe