⁣There seems to be some confusion here. 

James, I understand the tpm engine as an external project, not part of the 
OpenSSL source proper and not intended to be. 

However, openssl-dev@openssl.org is a list focused on the development of 
OpenSSL proper. That makes it a bit odd to discuss the tpm engine here. Largely 
off topic. 


Skickat från BlueMail ​

Den 2 jan. 2017 19:22, kI 19:22, "Salz, Rich" <rs...@akamai.com> skrev:
>> Really, how?  By pull request, you mean one against the openssl
>> 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
>> 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
>> 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
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Reply via email to