On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 1:46 AM Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > While the conflict, posses the question of why are we even implementing our > own RFC 2104 complaint HMAC while alternatives are readily available, the > simplest solution is to make sure the name is not as generic so it would > conflict with an equivalent one from the system (or linked libraries); so > rename it again to hmac_hash to reflect it will use the git's defined hash > function. > --- Missing sign-off.
