Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
No, as Joe said, you ignored prior comments - this isn't the first time that these concerns have been raised.
[...]
If and when you wish to address *all* of the issues, I (and I think Joe too; but I can't speak for him) will be happy to see it back on trunk.
+1 - although interfaces on trunk/ let us flesh out any issues, the flaws that Joe found (and I respect his and 3 other individuals judgments over all others when it comes to SSL implementations) reflect serious design flaws, and with issues of that severity I agree with Joe's decision to park this on a branch until these are proven to be well thought out.
