Re: [OMC VOTE PROPOSAL] macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS
On 27/11/2020 17:24, Matt Caswell wrote: > > > On 27/11/2020 17:15, Matt Caswell wrote: >> >> >> On 25/11/2020 20:17, Felix Bünemann wrote: >>> Regarding inclusion of macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS: >>> >>> The OMC accepts the required configuration change, making an exception to >>> the >>> LTS rule that prevents adding new platforms. >> >> I'm about to raise this vote, but I plan to tweak this wording to >> instead say: >> >> Regarding inclusion of macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS: >> The OMC accepts the required configuration change, making an exception >> to the rule that prevents adding new platforms to stable releases. >> >> >> This is just to make it a little more accurate. New platforms are >> counted as new features, and the rule is that we do not add new features >> to stable releases. The rule is not specific to an LTS release - its any >> stable release. > > I've started the vote. I'll report back once we have an answer. This vote has now closed. It passed: accepted: yes (for: 6, against: 1, abstained: 0, not voted: 0) Matt
Re: [OMC VOTE PROPOSAL] macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS
On 27/11/2020 17:15, Matt Caswell wrote: > > > On 25/11/2020 20:17, Felix Bünemann wrote: >> Regarding inclusion of macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS: >> >> The OMC accepts the required configuration change, making an exception to the >> LTS rule that prevents adding new platforms. > > I'm about to raise this vote, but I plan to tweak this wording to > instead say: > > Regarding inclusion of macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS: > The OMC accepts the required configuration change, making an exception > to the rule that prevents adding new platforms to stable releases. > > > This is just to make it a little more accurate. New platforms are > counted as new features, and the rule is that we do not add new features > to stable releases. The rule is not specific to an LTS release - its any > stable release. I've started the vote. I'll report back once we have an answer. Matt
Re: [OMC VOTE PROPOSAL] macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS
On 25/11/2020 20:17, Felix Bünemann wrote: > Regarding inclusion of macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS: > > The OMC accepts the required configuration change, making an exception to the > LTS rule that prevents adding new platforms. I'm about to raise this vote, but I plan to tweak this wording to instead say: Regarding inclusion of macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS: The OMC accepts the required configuration change, making an exception to the rule that prevents adding new platforms to stable releases. This is just to make it a little more accurate. New platforms are counted as new features, and the rule is that we do not add new features to stable releases. The rule is not specific to an LTS release - its any stable release. Matt
Re: [OMC VOTE PROPOSAL] macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:42:44PM +0100, Felix Bünemann wrote: > Hi Kurt, > > > Am 26.11.2020 um 18:57 schrieb Kurt Roeckx : > > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 09:17:13PM +0100, Felix Bünemann wrote: > >> > >> It is also unique cause it requires no code changes to support a new > >> platform. > > > > In a previous discussion we have talked about when a platform can > > be added in an LTS release. I think that in general if it's only > > configuration changes and there is a very low risk that it's going > > to have issues requiring other changes, we should allow it. > > Do you have a link to that discussion? It was in one of our online meetings, that resulted in the LTS+ proposal. > If there is a prior example where this has happened I should also remove the > statement that it is a unique case and mention the prior incident instead. As far as I know, there are no examples where we have allowed adding a platform in the stable release branch. Kurt
Re: [OMC VOTE PROPOSAL] macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS
Hi Kurt, > Am 26.11.2020 um 18:57 schrieb Kurt Roeckx : > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 09:17:13PM +0100, Felix Bünemann wrote: >> >> It is also unique cause it requires no code changes to support a new >> platform. > > In a previous discussion we have talked about when a platform can > be added in an LTS release. I think that in general if it's only > configuration changes and there is a very low risk that it's going > to have issues requiring other changes, we should allow it. Do you have a link to that discussion? If there is a prior example where this has happened I should also remove the statement that it is a unique case and mention the prior incident instead. > Kurt Regards, Felix Buenemann
Re: [OMC VOTE PROPOSAL] macOS ARM64 Support in OpenSSL 1.1.1 LTS
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 09:17:13PM +0100, Felix Bünemann wrote: > > It is also unique cause it requires no code changes to support a new platform. In a previous discussion we have talked about when a platform can be added in an LTS release. I think that in general if it's only configuration changes and there is a very low risk that it's going to have issues requiring other changes, we should allow it. Kurt
