Re: [PATCH 21.5] TLS support

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why not a public branch?  This is truly exciting stuff!  (Excuse my
> faux pas if you already did....)  N.B. If you decide to commit now, no
> point in a branch, of course.  I'm just hoping we can have more
> visibility for our activity going forward.

The consensus seems to be to push it to the master branch, so I will
do so.  I've got some other stuff coming up that would be good to push
onto a branch, though.  Would you like to see my D-Bus workspace?  (I
might need a little hand holding to get started with mercurial
branching.  I work with git branches a lot and am very comfortable
with them, but I still haven't managed to learn much about mercurial.)

> OK by me, since it's optional (should default to yes but build or
> other problems can be handled by --with-tls=no).
>
> I think you should try gnutls first, though, although you can document
> that choice as "likely to change".  Rationale: I have no objection to
> preferring nss or openssl once we resolve the gnutls.el compatibilty
> issue (even if we resolve it "not worth the effort"), but during the
> beta we really want as much Emacs code to work out of the box as
> possible.

That is a good point.  Okay, I have changed it to try gnutls first for
Emacs compatibility reasons.

> Please do it "soon" and I can release a beta (which you may have
> noticed is long overdue, fsck my employer -- not that fsck would help,
> it's broken-by-design).

I will push in a few moments, once I verify that I didn't break
anything by swapping the order of gnutls and nss checking.

> I say, just live with it.  People who want Emacs compatibility will
> just have to go --with-tls=gnutls for the nonce.

Okay.

> This isn't a real review, so no APPROVE, but I'm sure not gonna VETO
> if you self-approve.

Thanks for the "fake" review, then. :-)  It was helpful.

> P.S.  It would be appreciated if you would remove the patch to
> configure, and just leave configure.ac for review.  IMO YMMV WDOT?

Oh, geez.  Sorry.  I didn't mean to do that.  I'll try to avoid that
in the future.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/