On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Alex Shulgin <a...@commandprompt.com> > wrote: > > Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: > >>>> > >>>> Perhaps ssloptions.[ch], unless you plan to add non-option-related > code > >>>> there later? > >>> > >>> I don't think anything else than common options-related code fits in > >>> there, so ssloptions.c makes sense to me. > >>> > >>>> BTW, there is no Regent code in your openssl.c, so the copyright > >>>> statement is incorrect. > >>> > >>> Good catch, I just blindly copied that from some other file. > >> There have been arguments in favor and against this patch... But > >> marking it as returned with feedback because of a lack of activity in > >> the last couple of weeks. Feel free to update if you think that's not > >> correct, and please move this patch to commit fest 2014-12. > > > > Attached is a new version that addresses the earlier feedback: renamed > > the added *.[ch] files and removed incorrect copyright line. > > > > I'm moving this to the current CF. > This patch is statuquo since the beginning of this CF, at the > arguments are standing the same. If there is nothing happening maybe > it would be better to mark it as returned with feedback? Thoughts? > I am not sure where we are moving on here, and if anybody cares much about this patch... Hence marked as rejected. Feel free to complain... -- Michael
