Replies: 2 comments 4 replies
-
FWIW I'd like to proceed with #290 but we can release 0.11 and then the next release will be a bit breaking. There's no pressure on my side but I think #290 addresses some common concerns... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
2 replies
-
Maybe #289 as well since it addresses bugs? We could split the PR ourselves and mention @mematthias as original author if they don't have the time/will to do the work themselves :) I am generally wary of "scaring away" new contributors with too many comments/change requests 😅 So maybe this one should be on us! Happy to do it. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
2 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
The PKCS#11 3.2 changes as well as most of the important mechanisms landed. Is there anything else than #318, #317 that we need before cutting next release?
Any thoughts about #290 (API change) and #302 (could land later as it wont change API)? Any other ideas/thoughs @hug-dev @wiktor-k ?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions