Re: [2002-02-16] Release Status Update
On Sat, 2002-02-16 at 14:20, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> If your crypto support means linking to openssl (or maybe gnutls), and it
> does not implement any crypto of its own, you may actually have a chance, if
> the rest of the crypto red-tape gets cleared fast enough for woody.
That's pretty much the size of it.
> And you don't even have crypto-enabled packages in non-US/main (or somewhere
> else) yet, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU THINKING?! That means they have gone
> through none, or very little testing at all. Trying to get them into woody
> would be a Not Very Bright Idea(tm).
>
> You, as a maintainer, want your package crypto-enabled, and in main for
> woody? They you are already nearly out-of-time, get them in non-US and test
> them, or something like that.
Which implies all the upload-and-hope-the-NSA-isn't-watching stuff, or
the register-as-a-crypto-exporter stuff, neither of which I'm terribly
inclined to do.
Whatever. If no time will be alloted for situations like this, so be
it. It'll have to wait for woody+1.
Reply to: