Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 02:12:06 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, Doug Barton <Doug@gorean.org>, Victor Salaman <salaman@teknos.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: openssl in -current Message-ID: <v04210107b4d540dd79ef@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0002192229150.9556-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0002192229150.9556-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:31 PM -0800 2/19/00, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > if 4.0 is delayed, I want it delayed for things which are actually busted, > > and not to move features from the ports collection to the base system. > >No-one's talking about delaying 4.0. Not directly, but all the work trying to figure this out is work that could be going elsewhere in the 4.0 release. And if we did happen to get to the point where everything else WAS worked out, but this was not, then what would you want to happen? > > I think everyone agrees that having a cryptography toolkit in the > > base system would be great, but we don't have to have it for *this* > > release, and there are no "cool things" for *this* release which > > depend on some cryptography toolkit being part of the base system. > >Except it's not just this release, it's "for the life of the 4.x branch" >given the rules of what should get put into -stable. I really don't want >to have to wait another year or more for 5.0-RELEASE before we can start >making use of crypto in the recommended version of FreeBSD. Hmm. Well, I agree that I would not want to wait quite that long. If it absolutely must be in the base system for 4.0 for us to have it there in 4.x, then I guess I'd put the RSA-less (basically useless) version in the base system now, and then "update" that come september. Either that, or make the exception for this and say it will be in 4.1 even though it didn't make it for 4.0. I realize none of these are particularly attractive strategies, of course... I am agreeable to any strategy which helps get us to the goal of a cryptography kit in the base system, as long as it doesn't cause too much of a delay, and it won't cause any legal problems for people distributing freebsd. --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v04210107b4d540dd79ef>