Skip to content

0.102 release planning #159

Closed
Closed

Activity

  1. cpu commented on Sep 7, 2023

    @cpu
    Member

    Added a few more items to the list (most of which are already merged).

  2. cpu commented on Sep 20, 2023

    @cpu
    Member

    Almost there 🎉

  3. pinned this issue on Sep 21, 2023
  4. djc commented on Sep 21, 2023

    @djc
    MemberAuthor

    I think we should defer releasing the final version of this until the final rustls release is also ready, in order to avoid creating more semver-incompatible version branches (that we have to maintain according to our maintenance policy) if it still turns out that we have some churn in the API we want for rustls.

  5. cpu commented on Sep 21, 2023

    @cpu
    Member

    That sounds good to me.

  6. djc commented on Sep 22, 2023

    @djc
    MemberAuthor

    Thought about the requirements before release some more, added 3 items.

  7. cpu commented on Sep 28, 2023

    @cpu
    Member

    Push RevocationOptions into pki-types to avoid public webpki type in rustls API?

    We chatted about this one in a Discord thread. Making this change will require moving a lot of types into pki-types, most of which are actually specific to webpki and don't look like they would generalize well to other verifiers. There are some additional downsides to this approach as well, like having to un-seal the CertRevocationList trait.

    The line-item mentions leaking types into the rustls API but presently the webpki revocation types only appear in the webpki verifier bits that are already specific to webpki. The rustls/rustls#1430 issue that may have motivated this change can be accomplished by wrapping the webpki verifier so it doesn't seem like it would justify the work involved.

    In sum: I think we're going to table this idea for the 0.22 release and encourage 1430 be solved with other workarounds.

  8. ctz commented on Nov 20, 2023

    @ctz
    Member

    Push ServerName type into pki-types so it can be shared with rustls?

    That would include DnsName I suppose, so we could remove the duplication there (though it has a modest amount of behaviour for a crate that is so far mostly structural).

    I guess moving this up could theoretically be a non-breaking change? In the sense that both webpki and rustls could reexport the moved type? That is assuming the type we move is a superset of webpki::DnsName and rustls::DnsName?

  9. ctz commented on Nov 30, 2023

    @ctz
    Member

    Aside from some release engineering (taking pki-types to 1.0, editing versions here) I think this is done?

  10. djc commented on Nov 30, 2023

    @djc
    MemberAuthor

    Yeah, I think so!

  11. ctz commented on Nov 30, 2023

    @ctz
    Member
  12. unpinned this issue on Aug 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions