Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-02 Thread Michael Wojcik
> From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf > Of Dennis Clarke > Sent: Friday, June 02, 2017 10:28 > > Simply remove the CHANGES file from the source release. > > Since it clearly is not a "CHANGES" list nor is it useful. It may not be useful to you.

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-02 Thread Dennis Clarke
On 06/02/2017 10:36 AM, Salz, Rich via openssl-users wrote: Dennis, Feel free to not read any documentation you find superfluous :) I'll simply leave this here as an example of truely fine CHANGES docs : https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2017-June/058761.html Dennis Clarke ps:

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-02 Thread Dennis Clarke
you are the first person to raise this issue that I can recall in over 20 years. I'll just go back to my server cave then. dc -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-02 Thread Salz, Rich via openssl-users
Dennis, Feel free to not read any documentation you find superfluous :) Too much information is not something people often say about OpenSSL. We believe many people find the current file useful. To wit, you are the first person to raise this issue that I can recall in over 20 years. --

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-02 Thread Salz, Rich via openssl-users
> Appending a note that, for a full change log, [DO THIS], would probably be > well received. https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/3606 -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-02 Thread Dennis Clarke
Sure, would "Major changes" be sufficient? This is essentially a RELEASE_NOTES file, not a comprehensive change log, which is subsumed by git. Exactly. Lots of us have been trained by much experience that a file named CHANGES contains *all* of the changes, while a file named RELEASE_NOTES

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-02 Thread Mark H. Wood
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 09:18:26PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:54 AM, Wouter Verhelst > > wrote: > > > > It might be useful to make that point at the start of the CHANGES file, > > then. Currently, it just says "Changes between X.Y.Zx

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-02 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On 02-06-17 03:18, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:54 AM, Wouter Verhelst >> wrote: >> >> It might be useful to make that point at the start of the CHANGES file, >> then. Currently, it just says "Changes between X.Y.Zx and X.Y.Zy >> [date]". While

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
> On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:54 AM, Wouter Verhelst > wrote: > > It might be useful to make that point at the start of the CHANGES file, > then. Currently, it just says "Changes between X.Y.Zx and X.Y.Zy > [date]". While that doesn't claim to be complete, the simple word

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On 01-06-17 16:40, Matt Caswell wrote: > CHANGES is what it is - a list of changes we thought were particularly > worthy of note. If that's not enough information for you then use the > git logs. I see very little value in automatically extracting info out > of the logs and including it in the

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Matt Caswell
On 01/06/17 15:32, Dennis Clarke wrote: > >> They are easily obtainable even if you do not have git. The list for >> 1.0.2l is here: >> >> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commits/OpenSSL_1_0_2l > > ( point missed ) > > The issue is that the CHANGES file simply isn't. The most recent for >

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Dennis Clarke
They are easily obtainable even if you do not have git. The list for 1.0.2l is here: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commits/OpenSSL_1_0_2l ( point missed ) The issue is that the CHANGES file simply isn't. The most recent for 1.0.2l being truely spartan. If this were vim or perhaps nano

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Matt Caswell
On 01/06/17 15:17, Dennis Clarke wrote: > On 06/01/2017 09:53 AM, Salz, Rich via openssl-users wrote: >>> So the CHANGES file isn't really "changes". >> >> The full list of everything that has changed can be found via git >> logs. As Matt said, we only put particularly significant items

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Dennis Clarke
On 06/01/2017 09:53 AM, Salz, Rich via openssl-users wrote: So the CHANGES file isn't really "changes". The full list of everything that has changed can be found via git logs. As Matt said, we only put particularly significant items in the CHANGES file. Why? Why isn't the

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Salz, Rich via openssl-users
> So the CHANGES file isn't really "changes". The full list of everything that has changed can be found via git logs. As Matt said, we only put particularly significant items in the CHANGES file. -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe:

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Dennis Clarke
On 06/01/2017 06:42 AM, Matt Caswell wrote: On 25/05/17 15:29, Dennis Clarke wrote: So this is exclusively a change to support mingw64 ? Sorry, I missed this email somehow. This release rolls up numerous bug fixes that have been implemented since the last release. We only put particularly

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-06-01 Thread Matt Caswell
On 25/05/17 15:29, Dennis Clarke wrote: > > So this is exclusively a change to support mingw64 ? Sorry, I missed this email somehow. This release rolls up numerous bug fixes that have been implemented since the last release. We only put particularly significant items in CHANGES. Matt > >

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-05-25 Thread Dennis Clarke
So this is exclusively a change to support mingw64 ? That seems to be all that is said here : https://www.openssl.org/news/cl102.txt OpenSSL CHANGES ___ Changes between 1.0.2l and 1.0.2m [xx XXX ] *) Changes between 1.0.2k and 1.0.2l [25 May 2017] *) Have

Re: [openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published

2017-05-25 Thread Patrick Mayweg
Qint Software GmbH Marlene-Dietrich-Str.59 80636 München +49 172 8910563 Sitz: München HRB 117326 Geschäftsführer: Patrick Mayweg. > On 25.05.2017, at 15:57, OpenSSL wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > > OpenSSL version 1.0.2l released >