API renaming

[Richard Levitte]

Er, I don't feel like I was part of this "we".

I was very much part of the discussion that introduced OSSL_ and
OPENSSL_ as a common prefix, thought...  actually only three years
ago.

(historical note: I had written the STORE API, using STORE_ as a
prefix, but that was judged too common, and that's what sparked the
discussion at the time...  and that's why we now have a OSSL_STORE)

Cheers,
Richard

On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 07:26:23 +0200,
Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> The exact same points apply to EVP_MAC & EVP_KDF.
> 
> We have also been telling people “use EVP” for ages.
> 
> Pauli
> -- 
> Dr Paul Dale | Distinguished Architect | Cryptographic Foundations 
> Phone +61 7 3031 7217
> Oracle Australia
> 
>     On 24 Jul 2020, at 3:20 pm, Richard Levitte <levitte at openssl.org> wrote:
>    
>     A couple of points:
>    
>     1.  Quite a while ago, we (the team at the time) made a decision to
>        have all new APIs prefixed with 'OPENSSL_' or 'OSSL_'.  It seems
>        that we never voted on it, though, but still.
>    
>     2.  The new RAND API hasn't been merged yet, so it's not like we're
>        renaming something that already exists.
>    
>     So in terms of "it's just a prefix", OSSL_ would be just as suitable.
>     It's a bit more blatantly "OpenSSL", though.
>    
>     Cheers,
>     Richard
>    
>     On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 23:30:25 +0200,
>     Tim Hudson wrote:
>    
>         Placing everything under EVP is reasonable in my view. It is just a prefix and it really
>         has no
>         meaning these days as it became nothing more than a common prefix to use.
>        
>         I don't see any significant benefit in renaming at this point - even for RAND.
>        
>         Tim.
>        
>         On Fri, 24 Jul 2020, 1:56 am Matt Caswell, <matt at openssl.org> wrote:
>        
>            On 23/07/2020 16:52, Richard Levitte wrote:
>        
>             On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:18:10 +0200,
>             Dr Paul Dale wrote:
>            
>                 There has been a suggestion to rename EVP_RAND to OSSL_RAND.  This seems
>                 reasonable.  Would
>            
>            it
>        
>                 also make sense to rename the other new APIs similarly.
>                 More specifically, EVP_MAC and EVP_KDF to OSSL_MAC and OSSL_KDF respectively?
> 
>             This is a good question...
>            
>             Historically speaking, even though EVP_MAC and EVP_KDF are indeed new
>             APIs, they have a previous history of EVP APIs, through EVP_PKEY.  The
>             impact of relocating them outside of the EVP "family" may be small,
>             but still, history gives me pause.
>            
>             RAND doesn't carry the same sort of history, which makes it much
>             easier for me to think "just do it and get it over with"...
> 
>            I have the same pause - so  I'm thinking just RAND for now.
>        
>            Matt
> 
>     --
>     Richard Levitte         levitte at openssl.org
>     OpenSSL Project         http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
> 
> 
-- 
Richard Levitte         levitte at openssl.org
OpenSSL Project         http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/