On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 6:27 PM Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The honest answer: I don't actually remember what I was thinking > (other stuff stole my focus) but my comment neither makes much > sense to me. Please just ignore it, and apologies for causing > confusion. No apologies needed! > There's something I'm looking into in my spare time right now. > I'm experimenting with interfacing keyring types to Rust. The > first step, I guess, is to provide a Rust abstraction for > assoc_array. > > I've skimmed through the patch set and have now *rough* idea of > patterns and techniques. My opens are more on the process side > of things since there's no yet mainline subtree. Thanks a lot for taking a look and taking the initiative. > If I send a patch or patch sets, would this be a good workflow: > > 1. RFC tag. > 2. In the cover letter denote the patch set version, which was > used the baseline. Sounds good to me. Alternatively, you can use a `--base=` pointing to one of the commits in our `rust` branch. Cheers, Miguel
