Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:15:15 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Mask mode integration with bleeding. On 9 Aug, 2013, at 10:35 , Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > Sayantan, magnum, Lukas - > > On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 01:11:26PM +0530, Sayantan Datta wrote: >> I think we should fork another repo which will have up-to-date current >> bleeding along with my mask-mode commits. I expect all new commits to main >> bleeding to go into the new repo as well. I'll check new commits and >> discuss if it has any potential interference with mask mode stuffs. This >> way main bleeding will remain 100% bug free and I can maintain mask-mode as >> close to main-bleeding as possible. > > I like this approach. The only reason why I did not suggest it is that > it may be more work for Sayantan, but since Sayantan himself proposes > it, let's do it. Sounds good to me too. > >> magnum can you fork another repo from main-bleeding name it PG-test(or >> whatever seems suitable) ? > > Let's use some new name, to avoid confusion with myrice's work. I like > to be able to refer to myrice's tree as PG-test. > > How about calling it bleeding-mask? I too think bleeding-mask is better. And like Dhiru said, you don't need me for this - you can push new branches directly. magnum
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.