On Thu, 2020-12-31 at 02:50 +0000, Peter Stuge wrote: > Michał Górny wrote: > > > > I think the three main ways forward from here would be to > > > > either: > > > > > > > > 1. Keep LibreSSL for indefinite time (possibly masked) > > > > 2. Eventually move LibreSSL to libressl overlay. > > > > 3. Eventually remove LibreSSL. > > > > > > 4. A libressl or libressl-libtls ebuild installs only libtls. > > > > dev-libs/libretls already does that. > > dev-libs/libretls doesn't install a libressl libtls. > > This thread is obviously about how the libressl implementation remains > in use. > > It's clear now that you want to hinder that in Gentoo at any cost to > the community, but that's not useful, so please take a step back > unless > you are actually going to be constructive. > > My proposition 4. (which I suggested already earlier - you shouldn't > have ignored it) is obviously not about having any libtls provider in > the tree, but to model reality accurately and ensure that libretls is > the primary and prefered libtls provider, since it is literally the > libtls upstream. > > It is important to me that you can choose dev-libs/libretls instead of > having any libretls code on your systems, but I reject you forcing > that > choice of yours on everyone else. > > > //Peter >
Patches welcome.
