> Really, how?  By pull request, you mean one against the openssl github
> account so people subscribing to that account see it, I presume?  For that to
> happen, the tree the patch is against must actually exist within the account,
> which this one doesn't.

You clone the openssl git repo, create your own branch off master, apply the 
diffs you are mailing to the list, and commit/push and then make a PR.  Yes 
it's a bit of work for you.  But it then becomes near-zero work for anyone on 
openssl to look at it.

> This patch is mostly FYI, so yes, I do given that multiple mailing lists have
> some interest.

It's all about trade-offs.  Multiple people have said multiple times that PR's 
are the best way to work with OpenSSL.  If those other groups, individually or 
collectively, are higher on your priority list, that's fine.  But do understand 
what's going on.

> I'm still waiting on a reply ... I assume holidays are contributing to the 
> delay.
> However, openssl_tpm_engine is a DCO project, so that concern is irrelevant
> here.

Sorry, I'll push to get the bylaws made public, is that what you need?

And no, it's not irrelevant.  If this is ever going to appear in OpenSSL, a CLA 
must be signed.

openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Reply via email to