I've found what's going wrong there, and I agree that it needs to be fixed ASAP, although I don't view it per se as a beta 1 blocker.
Either way, a fix is coming up. Cheers, Richard On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 19:21:50 +0200, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote: > > > Dear Matt, > > I think #12891 is a significant problem. I'd suggest fixing it before beta1 > or at least discuss > it. > > Many thanks! > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 3:48 PM Matt Caswell <[email protected]> wrote: > > There's been quite a number of PRs added to the 3.0 beta 1 milestone. > > Within the PRs there are a couple of bug fixes: > > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12884 > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12874 > > IMO these would be really nice to get into beta 1, but they should not > be considered blockers for it (i.e. if they didn't go in, it shouldn't > stop us from releasing beta 1). > > There are also some nice-to-have items: > > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12777 > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12771 > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12726 > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12669 > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12072 > > Again - these are nice-to-have, and if they happen to get merged in time > for beta 1 then great. Otherwise, they should wait for 3.1 (possibly > things which are just cleanup/minor refactoring could still be done > within the beta period). So, IMO, these should not be considered > blockers either. > > So - this leads me to the question - what is the milestone for? Does it > means these things *must* go in before we can release beta 1? Or does it > mean we would *like* to get these things in for beta 1? > > I actually don't mind either way - but if its the latter, then I need a > way of identifying the "must haves". These are the top priority items, > and at the moment I can't easily track their progress. > > Matt > > -- > SY, Dmitry Belyavsky > > -- Richard Levitte [email protected] OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
