Обсуждение: Capitalization of the name OpenSSL

Skimming over SSL code and docs I noticed that we almost always properly
capitalize “OpenSSL" when referring to the name of the library, using "openssl”
for when referring to the cli application.  The attached patch fixes the few
occurrences where the name is referred to, but which aren’t spelled “OpenSSL”.
Also moves the link to openssl.org to using https:// as it redirects anyways.

cheers ./daniel

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:16:52AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Skimming over SSL code and docs I noticed that we almost always properly
> capitalize “OpenSSL" when referring to the name of the library, using "openssl”
> for when referring to the cli application.  The attached patch fixes the few
> occurrences where the name is referred to, but which aren’t spelled “OpenSSL”.
> Also moves the link to openssl.org to using https:// as it redirects anyways.

I see more that 860 references to openssl as lower case with lots of
noise around file names and translations.  And I can see that you missed
two of them:

contrib/pgcrypto/openssl.c: * Check if strong crypto is supported. Some
openssl installations

src/interfaces/libpq/fe-secure-openssl.c:/* This should exactly match
openssl's SSL_set_fd except for using my BIO */

I don't think that the comments are worth bothering for anything else
than HEAD, now should the doc changes be back-patched?  I would tend to
do so.
--
Michael

> On 28 Jun 2018, at 04:54, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:

> I see more that 860 references to openssl as lower case with lots of
> noise around file names and translations.  And I can see that you missed
> two of them:

Nice catch, fixed in the attached.

> I don't think that the comments are worth bothering for anything else
> than HEAD, now should the doc changes be back-patched?  I would tend to
> do so.

Not sure if it’s worth any back-patching at all to be honest, but I’ll leave
that call to you.

cheers ./daniel

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 09:44:13AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Normally I'm the biggest promoter for back-patching documentation changes
> :) But in the case when it's really just about the capitalization, I think
> it's fine to just bother with HEAD for it.

Yeah, after second-thoughts I think that I'll just fix that on HEAD
tomorrow and call it a day if there are no objections after
double-checking that no spots are missing as that's mainly cosmetic.
--
Michael

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 09:54:35AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> On 28 Jun 2018, at 04:54, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>> I see more that 860 references to openssl as lower case with lots of
>> noise around file names and translations.  And I can see that you missed
>> two of them:
>
> Nice catch, fixed in the attached.

I found a couple of extra ones in the past release notes, which I fixed
as well to make all references more consistent.

>> I don't think that the comments are worth bothering for anything else
>> than HEAD, now should the doc changes be back-patched?  I would tend to
> > do so.
>
> Not sure if it’s worth any back-patching at all to be honest, but I’ll leave
> that call to you.

Yes, done only on HEAD.
--
Michael