On 01/09/2018 01:47 PM, Misaki Miyashita wrote:
>>> Sorry, I meant to say it is for the 1.0.2 branch.
>> Except in exceptional circumstances, code only ends up in the 1.0.2
>> branch after having first gotten into the master branch and then the
>> 1.1.0 branch.  The current release policy only allows bug fixes to be
>> backported to the stable branches, not new features. To me, this code
>> seems more like a new feature than a bugfix, though I do not claim to
>> speak authoritatively on the matter.
>> The preferred mechanism for submitting patches is as github pull
>> requests (against the master branch, with a note in the pull request
>> message if the backport is desired).
> Thank so much for your comment, Ben.
> We are planing to upgrade to the 1.1.0 branch as soon as we can which
> is not so easy to do at this moment as we need the FIPS capability.
> Thus, we are still focusing on the 1.0.2 release, and haven't had a
> chance to work on the 1.1.0 branch.  Thus, I won't be able to submit a
> PR against the master branch at this moment.
> Thus, I was hoping to get a review on the suggested fix for the 1.0.2
> to see it is viable by the upstream first.
> Would it be possible to get a review on the openssl-dev@openssl.org
> alias? or filing an issue via github is the right course of action?

You already got a review, from Viktor.  I don't think there's much
reason to file an issue in github without a patch (and if there's a
patch, it should just go straight to a pull request with no separate
issue).  If you want the feature to get upstreamed, the onus is on you
to forward-port the patch to master and adapt it to review comments; I
don't think we've seen sufficient interest to cause a team member to
spontaneously take that work upon themselves.


> Thanks again for your comment.
> Regards,
> -- misaki

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

Reply via email to