On Sat, Jun 09, 2018 at 09:28:17AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > I am still not completely sure what is the correct course of action > here. Heikki and Peter and not much in favor of adding more complexity > here as OpenSSL has a long history of having a non-linear history across > platforms. On the other side, PGDG provides packages down to RHEL6, and > there are surely servers which use it as backend.
As Peter and Heikki have worked as well on all those features with me, are there any objection to discard this open item? I looked again at the patch this morning and it is true that OpenSSL's history makes things harder, so keeping code consistent and simple with their last LTS version is appealing. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
