Hello, On 27 October 2016 at 11:40, Jörg Frings-Fürst <deb...@jff-webhosting.net> wrote: > Hello, > > I have read the discussion about the openssl transition here again. > > One of the last notes was to be used openssl 1.0 and 1.1 in parallel > because of the non-trivial changes. > > So I have some questions: > > - The parallel use of release 1.0 and 1.1 will not be pursued? > > - Why is the transition started with 0 (zero) good packages (from 552)? >
I do not see that a transition has started. There are bug reports tagged for the transition: https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?tag=openssl-1.1-trans&user=pkg-openssl-devel-request%40lists.alioth.debian.org https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bts-usertags.cgi?tag=openssl-1.1-trans-keypkg&user=pkg-openssl-devel-request%40lists.alioth.debian.org There is 1.1 openssl in experimental: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/openssl This did trigger an automated transition tracker to be created: https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-openssl.html But do note that "This tracker was setup by a very simple automated tool. The tool may not be very smart..." However no transition has started. Transitions only start once the new ABI is uploaded into unstable, which has not happened. > - Should it be safer to switch to a new API at short notice and > under pressure? > > > CU > Jörg > -- > New: > GPG Fingerprint: 63E0 075F C8D4 3ABB 35AB 30EE 09F8 9F3C 8CA1 D25D > GPG key (long) : 09F89F3C8CA1D25D > GPG Key : 8CA1D25D > CAcert Key S/N : 0E:D4:56 > > Old pgp Key: BE581B6E (revoked since 2014-12-31). > > Jörg Frings-Fürst > D-54470 Lieser > > Threema: SYR8SJXB > > IRC: j_...@freenode.net > j_...@oftc.net > > My wish list: > - Please send me a picture from the nature at your home. -- Regards, Dimitri.
