You sent this at 7 PM Pacific which is after hours and are expecting feedback by 9 AM Pacific. I don't think that's nearly enough time to vet the latest changes you've made. On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 6:58 PM Richard Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:
> OK, I have updated the preconditions PR to reflect this discussion. It's > more invasive than I thought going in, but I think it hangs together. > > https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/124 > > If there are not major objections before tomorrow morning EST, I'm going > to go ahead and merge it. We can always back it out if we have buyer's > remorse later. > > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 8:18 PM, Salz, Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > There are dozens of projects that will need to rework their code if we >> > restructure the protocol, including most of these and probably a lot >> that >> > aren't listed: >> > >> > https://letsencrypt.org/docs/client-options/ >> >> That's the LetsEncrypt protocol, not the IETF ACME protocol. We're not >> here to polish the staples and rubber-stamp. >> >> /r$, speaking as co-chair. >> >> >> -- >> Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies >> IM: [email protected] Twitter: RichSalz >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Acme mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme >
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
