On Tue, 2021-08-03 at 06:50 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 5:59 AM Simo Sorce <simo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2021-08-02 at 17:43 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 5:39 PM Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 11:11 AM Simo Sorce <simo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I think at this stage it may be safer to defer to F36, and land OpenSSL > > > > > 3.0 in rawhide right after F35 forks out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm generally in agreement here; I think it's too much risk too late > > > > in the cycle. Could you re-propose the Change for F36? > > > > > > I'm not sure I agree, but the Change owners can request the proposal > > > to be deferred to F36, which I *personally* would accept if > > > they intended to import OpenSSL 3.0 into Rawhide *right* after > > > branching. No more delaying it since it's clearly being done in RHEL > > > (which is already super-backwards to begin with). This Change has > > > already been deferred once (it was originally planned for F34). I > > > don't want it deferred again without a plan to work on it *in Fedora*. > > > > > > Otherwise, just abandon the Change entirely. > > > > Neal, > > you are addressing this as if the OpenSSL maintainers are being > > capricious. > > > > We deferred the introduction of OpenSSL 3.0 in Fedora because we did > > not want a mess in a distribution that is actually used, out of concern > > for our users. > > > > We can "dump" OpenSSL 3.0 in Fedora at any time, but we consciously > > choose not to as to avoid pain for users. We cannot drop the Change > > because we have to introduce OpenSSL 3.0 at some point, we just want to > > introduce it when it's right for Fedora. > > > > My irritation comes from the lack of communication from the Change > owner. This Change has already been deferred once (for good reason, > mind you). I'm annoyed that this is being deferred again because this > time the Change owner hasn't said *anything* at all. Everyone else > seems to be speaking (even Florian, which confuses me). I wouldn't > mind the Change being deferred again for solid technical reasons, but > I don't know how to trust that this Change is ever going to get done > because zero work happened and zero communication happened. The fact work isn't visible, doesn't mean nothing happened. That said, upstream broke the ABI between alpha and beta1 so we are very happy that we "have done nothing" in Fedora and delayed the change. Simo. -- Simo Sorce RHEL Crypto Team Red Hat, Inc _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
