On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Peter Stuge <peter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Michael Stapelberg wrote: > > At this point it should be obvious, but let me state that I don’t have > > motivation/time to spend on this right now, given that upstream shows 0 > > interest in this at all :( > > What do you expect? It's a significant change, a seemingly convoluted > specification and there was no discussion with upstream before > embarking on the project. > I agree that it’s a significant change. With regards to discussion with upstream: before my first post, I looked for any sort of contributor guidelines on the openssh.org website and couldn’t find anything. Without any guidelines to go on, my default approach is to contact upstream by sending a patch, demonstrating the feasibility of what I’m suggesting. If this is not the way OpenSSH works, it’s worth documenting that somewhere prominent, so that new contributors are made aware of that. GitHub for example promotes a special file called CONTRIBUTING.md: https://github.com/blog/1184-contributing-guidelines With regards to what I expect: regardless of how I initially contacted upstream, I still think that not even getting as much as “Oh, I can imagine we would like to eventually merge this, please give me a month to get back to you” from upstream is very discouraging. I also want to point out that I have sent my first initial request for comments on 2014-11-05, which by now is almost 4 months ago. I do understand and acknowledge that we are all busy people with little time, but from what I can tell upstream’s opinion might as well be “this will never get in”, and then I’d just be wasting my time. I hope what I just wrote makes some sense (if not, please ask for clarifications!) and doesn’t offend any of the project members. I wrote it with the best of intentions, and I really think that the OpenSSH project should improve in such a situation as the one we’re talking about. > > > > Hence, any help on this is welcome. > > FWIW, if u2f must not be the sole authentication then that should of > course be checked by the code. > > > //Peter > _______________________________________________ > openssh-unix-dev mailing list > openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev > _______________________________________________ openssh-unix-dev mailing list openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
