On 02/07/18 18:36, Salz, Rich wrote:
> Thanks for finishing this off.
>
>
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A1.1.1
>
> Are 6512 and 6396 the same, and closed because we made things more secure?
They may be the same, or maybe not. Almost cer
Thanks for finishing this off.
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A1.1.1
Are 6512 and 6396 the same, and closed because we made things more secure?
Is 6342 a python bug, they'll need to upgrade?
Is 6228 a foolscap issue?
I think we can close 62
On 27/06/18 16:10, Matt Caswell wrote:
> Well, no one has objected so far. I'm not around tomorrow and Friday to
> action this but, unless anyone shouts between now and then, I'll start
> doing this on Monday.
All issues have been reviewed and their milestones updated accordingly.
I also reviewe
Well, no one has objected so far. I'm not around tomorrow and Friday to
action this but, unless anyone shouts between now and then, I'll start
doing this on Monday.
Matt
On 26/06/18 21:15, Matt Caswell wrote:
>
>
> On 26/06/18 20:43, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> That's interesting. Would we put a bug
On 26/06/18 20:43, Salz, Rich wrote:
> That's interesting. Would we put a bugfix in 1.1.0, not put the fix in 1.1.1
> until our first "a" release?
>
> Or are you saying that if it's in 1.1.0, then we don't have to fix it until
> after 1.1.1 comes out? That seems justifiable to me.
The latte
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 07:43:45PM +, Salz, Rich wrote:
> That's interesting. Would we put a bugfix in 1.1.0, not put the fix in 1.1.1
> until our first "a" release?
>
> Or are you saying that if it's in 1.1.0, then we don't have to fix it until
> after 1.1.1 comes out? That seems justifia
That's interesting. Would we put a bugfix in 1.1.0, not put the fix in 1.1.1
until our first "a" release?
Or are you saying that if it's in 1.1.0, then we don't have to fix it until
after 1.1.1 comes out? That seems justifiable to me.
On 6/26/18, 3:32 PM, "Matt Caswell" wrote:
On 26/06/18 18:18, Salz, Rich wrote:
> So are you saying look at the 73 open issues at
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/milestone/9 and re-evaluate them?
Exactly. My guess is that a significant proportion of them also apply to
1.1.0 and therefore should not hold up the 1.1.1 release. At the
So are you saying look at the 73 open issues at
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/milestone/9 and re-evaluate them?
On 6/26/18, 11:56 AM, "Matt Caswell" wrote:
I'm thinking that we should maybe re-asses the current milestones in github.
We currently use the following milestones
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 04:56:26PM +0100, Matt Caswell wrote:
> I'm thinking that we should maybe re-asses the current milestones in github.
>
> We currently use the following milestones:
>
> Assessed - Anything against this milestone isn't relevant to the 1.1.1
> release (e.g. 1.0.2 specific iss
10 matches
Mail list logo
