On 2 October 2018 at 05:45, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Herbert, > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 5:39 AM Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > I would also strongly prefer that all crypto work is taken through >> > Herbert's tree, so we have a coherent view of it before it goes >> > upstream. >> >> I agree. I don't have any problems with the zinc code living in >> its own git tree. But any upstream merges should definitely go >> through the crypto tree because the inherent ties between the two >> code-base. > > I can send you pull requests then if there are development cycles when > there are in fact relations between the two trees. I'll update the > commit message describing Zinc to include this. > Can you explain why you it is so important to you that your changes remain outside the crypto tree? Also, I still think the name Zinc (zinc is not crypto/) is needlessly divisive and condescending, and unsaying it (in v2 and up) doesn't really work on the Internet (especially since you are still repeating it in your conference talk.)
