Oh, left out: or even enough time for people to read this email to know they need to object. I just happened to be up. On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:07 AM Jeff Hodges <j...@somethingsimilar.com> wrote:
> You sent this at 7 PM Pacific which is after hours and are expecting > feedback by 9 AM Pacific. I don't think that's nearly enough time to vet > the latest changes you've made. > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 6:58 PM Richard Barnes <r...@ipv.sx> wrote: > >> OK, I have updated the preconditions PR to reflect this discussion. It's >> more invasive than I thought going in, but I think it hangs together. >> >> https://github.com/ietf-wg-acme/acme/pull/124 >> >> If there are not major objections before tomorrow morning EST, I'm going >> to go ahead and merge it. We can always back it out if we have buyer's >> remorse later. >> >> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 8:18 PM, Salz, Rich <rs...@akamai.com> wrote: >> >>> > There are dozens of projects that will need to rework their code if we >>> > restructure the protocol, including most of these and probably a lot >>> that >>> > aren't listed: >>> > >>> > https://letsencrypt.org/docs/client-options/ >>> >>> That's the LetsEncrypt protocol, not the IETF ACME protocol. We're not >>> here to polish the staples and rubber-stamp. >>> >>> /r$, speaking as co-chair. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies >>> IM: richs...@jabber.at Twitter: RichSalz >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Acme mailing list >> Acme@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme >> >
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
