1.1.1f

[Tim Hudson]

+1 for a release - and soon - and without bundling any more changes. The
circumstances justify getting this fix out. But I also think we need to
keep improvements that aren't bug fixes out of stable branches.

Tim.

On Fri, 27 Mar 2020, 3:12 am Matt Caswell, <matt at openssl.org> wrote:

> On 26/03/2020 15:14, Short, Todd wrote:
> > This type of API-braking change should be reserved for something like
> > 3.0, not a patch release.
> >
> > Despite it being a "incorrect", it is expected behavior.
> >
>
> Right - but the question now is not whether we should revert it (it has
> been reverted) - but whether this should trigger a 1.1.1f release soon?
>
> Matt
>
> > --
> > -Todd Short
> > // tshort at akamai.com <mailto:tshort at akamai.com>
> > // “One if by land, two if by sea, three if by the Internet."
> >
> >> On Mar 26, 2020, at 11:03 AM, Dr. Matthias St. Pierre
> >> <Matthias.St.Pierre at ncp-e.com <mailto:Matthias.St.Pierre at ncp-e.com>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree, go ahead.
> >>
> >> Please also consider reverting the change for the 3.0 alpha release as
> >> well, see Daniel Stenbergs comment
> >> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/11378#issuecomment-603730581
> >> <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_openssl_openssl_issues_11378-23issuecomment-2D603730581&d=DwMGaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=QBEcQsqoUDdk1Q26CzlzNPPUkKYWIh1LYsiHAwmtRik&m=87AtfQDFl1z9cdRP12QeRUizmgnW6ejbufNT40Gip4Q&s=djWoIIXyggxwOfbwrmYGrSJdR5tWm06IdzY9x9tDxkA&e=
> >
> >>
> >> Matthias
> >>
> >>
> >> *From**:* openssl-project <openssl-project-bounces at openssl.org
> >> <mailto:openssl-project-bounces at openssl.org>> *On Behalf Of *Dmitry
> >> Belyavsky
> >> *Sent:* Thursday, March 26, 2020 3:48 PM
> >> *To:* Matt Caswell <matt at openssl.org <mailto:matt at openssl.org>>
> >> *Cc:* openssl-project at openssl.org <mailto:openssl-project at openssl.org>
> >> *Subject:* Re: 1.1.1f
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 5:14 PM Matt Caswell <matt at openssl.org
> >> <mailto:matt at openssl.org>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     The EOF issue (https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/11378
> >>     <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_openssl_openssl_issues_11378&d=DwMGaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=QBEcQsqoUDdk1Q26CzlzNPPUkKYWIh1LYsiHAwmtRik&m=87AtfQDFl1z9cdRP12QeRUizmgnW6ejbufNT40Gip4Q&s=MAiLjfGJWaKvnBvqnM4fcyvGVfUyj9CDANO_vh4wfco&e=
> >)
> >>     has
> >>     resulted in us reverting the original EOF change in the 1.1.1 branch
> >>     (https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/11400
> >>     <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_openssl_openssl_pull_11400&d=DwMGaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=QBEcQsqoUDdk1Q26CzlzNPPUkKYWIh1LYsiHAwmtRik&m=87AtfQDFl1z9cdRP12QeRUizmgnW6ejbufNT40Gip4Q&s=3hBU2pt84DQlrY1dCnSn9x1ah1gSzH6NEO_bNRH-6DE&e=
> >).
> >>
> >>     Given that this seems to have broken quite a bit of stuff, I propose
> >>     that we do a 1.1.1f soon (possibly next Tuesday - 31st March).
> >>
> >>     Thoughts?
> >>
> >>
> >> I strongly support this idea.
> >>
> >> --
> >> SY, Dmitry Belyavsky
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-project/attachments/20200327/9fa1286e/attachment.html>