Re: [openssl-project] A proposal for an updated OpenSSL version scheme (v2)
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 01:02:29AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > > On Sep 22, 2018, at 12:59 AM, Richard Levitte wrote: > > > > So in summary, do we agree on this, and that it's a good path forward? > > > > - semantic versioning scheme good, we should adopt it. > > - we need to agree on how to translate that in code. > > - we need to stop fighting about history. > > Yes. +100. -Ben ___ openssl-project mailing list openssl-project@openssl.org https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project
Re: [openssl-project] A proposal for an updated OpenSSL version scheme (v2)
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 01:12:21AM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > > On Sep 22, 2018, at 12:50 AM, Tim Hudson wrote: > > > > The impact of the breaking change on anyone actually following our > > documented encoding cannot. > > i.e. openssh as one example Richard pointed out. > > The only use of OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER bits in OpenSSH (which is not yet > ported to > 1.1.x upstream BTW, so hardly relevant really) is: It seems that they have done the porting just in the past couple weeks: 482d23bcac upstream: hold our collective noses and use the openssl-1.1.x 48f54b9d12 adapt -portable to OpenSSL 1.1x API 86e0a9f3d2 upstream: use only openssl-1.1.x API here too a3fd8074e2 upstream: missed a bit of openssl-1.0.x API in this unittest cce8cbe0ed Fix openssl-1.1 fallout for --without-openssl. -Ben ___ openssl-project mailing list openssl-project@openssl.org https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project