On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 at 11:35, PGNet Dev <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sure. Your attitude and threats are not helpful in this conversation though. > > Threats? WTF are you talking about?
Talking about: > I'll have to decide whether I'm more interested in haproxy, or a consistently > 'modern/current' openssl api. Atm, I'm leaning to sticking with the openssl > api restriction(s). Not sure how I'd have to interpret this other than a passive-aggressive threat. > I was a having a constructive exchange with someone I thought was > interested in addressing an issue, and looking into what I might > contribute to address it. I just said: > And someone can step up and send a patch or it will > be updated further down the line, but you are making a big deal out of > it, which it really is not. If you want to contribute, that's great and welcomed. A little less confrontational and little more constructive language would certainly not hurt this conversation is what I'm saying. cheers, lukas
