On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Alex Shulgin <ash@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes: >>>> >>>> Perhaps ssloptions.[ch], unless you plan to add non-option-related code >>>> there later? >>> >>> I don't think anything else than common options-related code fits in >>> there, so ssloptions.c makes sense to me. >>> >>>> BTW, there is no Regent code in your openssl.c, so the copyright >>>> statement is incorrect. >>> >>> Good catch, I just blindly copied that from some other file. >> There have been arguments in favor and against this patch... But >> marking it as returned with feedback because of a lack of activity in >> the last couple of weeks. Feel free to update if you think that's not >> correct, and please move this patch to commit fest 2014-12. > > Attached is a new version that addresses the earlier feedback: renamed > the added *.[ch] files and removed incorrect copyright line. > > I'm moving this to the current CF.
This patch is statuquo since the beginning of this CF, at the arguments are standing the same. If there is nothing happening maybe it would be better to mark it as returned with feedback? Thoughts?
I am not sure where we are moving on here, and if anybody cares much about this patch... Hence marked as rejected. Feel free to complain... --
