In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
>>
>> 3moeller> Then direct VMS users to an appropriate snapshot in the
>> 3moeller> announcements, because the latest VMS changes are also not
>> 3moeller> in the tar file.
>>
>> Drat. OK, I'll build my own tarball and will direct the VMS folks to
>> it (not that it's terribly important, except for the missing command
>> symbols in VMS/openssl_utils.com, but that will get rid of most
>> annoying bug reports about that :-)).
>>
>> Teaches me not to assume a patch sent in ~8 hours before the time it
>> was announced that the tar ball would be built (someone asid 20:00)
>> will get into said tarball...
>
> Well, we already have a BN problem - lets leave it a day or two and roll
> 0.9.3a (sigh).
>
> If people could stick to bugfix-only mode 'til, say, tomorrow, that'll
> make life easier (or shall I just branch now and be done with it?).
No, branches are not needed, IMHO. It's ok when we focus on
bugfixing and kick out 0.9.3a tomorrow.
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
