[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130809083550.GA29195@openwall.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 12:35:50 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Mask mode integration with bleeding.
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.
> 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?
Alexander
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.
