In message <[email protected]> on Thu, 21 Jun 2018 20:08:13 
-0500, Benjamin Kaduk <[email protected]> said:

kaduk> What's still unclear to me in the current scheme is how I'm supposed to
kaduk> indicate something that is (intentionally) API/ABI-breaking and must be
kaduk> postponed to the next major release.  Bear in mind that we still don't 
know
kaduk> of the release after 1.1.1 will be such a thing or not...

Argh!

I'm pretty sure I added a label '1.2.0' to do *exactly* that.
Apparently, not everyone agrees with such indication...

-- 
Richard Levitte         [email protected]
OpenSSL Project         http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
_______________________________________________
openssl-project mailing list
[email protected]
https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project

Reply via email to