[Info-vax] OpenSSL CSWS-2.2-1

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 4/29/2019 2:30 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
> On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 12:30:05 PM UTC-5, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2019-04-29, Craig A. Berry <craig.a.berry at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> While it will probably throw a wrench into human-readable version
>>> comparisons for those versions that already exist, v3.x.x might be a good
>>> time to deal with the fact that in a few years there will likely be an
>>> OpenSSL 10.x.x.  A product name like SSL0300 for a release based on OpenSSL
>>> 3.0.x would have an obvious relationship to a product called SSL1013 and
>>> based on OpenSSL 10.13.x.

>> In fact, all VMS kits based around open source products should just use
>> the open source product version number as part of the kit name instead
>> of making up a version number that is VMS specific.
>>
>> Having VMS specific version numbers for open source products is just
>> yet another source of confusion that simply does not need to exist.

> I agree, but I'm actually talking about product names not version
> numbers. If you want to simultaneously support two different versions
> that are not binary compatible with each other, you need different
> product names and they need to appear not just in the kit names but also
> in the filenames of whatever libraries end up in sys$share or
> sys$library, not to mention system-level logical names.

This is only a problem if products insist on dumping their stuff
into the operating systems structure.

Very common across operating systems.

But still a bad idea in my opinion.

Arne