<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">There is some pushback against the deprecations going on in various PRs.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The plan has always been to deprecate engines in 3.0 and removing support for them 5+ years later. Originally, the path was to have included an engine provider that could load engines and make them appear to be a provider. After a fair amount of investigation, this was deemed to be too difficult in the 3.0 time frame.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Do we still want to deprecate engines in 3.0?</div><div class="">Should we defer until 4.0 instead?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The main benefits seem to boil down to continuing to support existing engines vs removing the legacy code paths and switching to the provider model.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div class="">
<div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div>Pauli<br class="">-- <br class="">Dr Paul Dale | Distinguished Architect | Cryptographic Foundations <br class="">Phone +61 7 3031 7217<br class="">Oracle Australia</div><div><br class=""></div></div></div></div></body></html>