Re: ECDH support for sendmail

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Nov 5,  6:22am, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
} 
} If nobody complain, I would like to commit this patch, which brings

      This is very much the wrong way to go about things when a
package is marked with OWNER=.  This is what the guide says:

-----
OWNER should be used instead of MAINTAINER when you do not want
other developers to update or change the package without contacting
you first.
-----

OWNER= presents a high barrier to making random changes.  To make
a change you MUST contact the OWNER directly and EXPLICITLY ask
for permission.  This is the opposite of "If nobody complain,".

} optional ECDH support to the sendmail package:
} http://ftp.Espci.fr/shadow/manu/sendmail-ecdh.patch

     I'm not opposed to adding support for ECDH, but I really don't
like the way you've gone about it, so for now I am rejecting your
patch.  And, like gdt@, I would like to know the origin of this
patch.  This would help me know more about it, and decide how to
handle it.

     BTW, are you aware that Eliptic Curve cryptography has recently
come under controversy due to alleged NSA interference?

}-- End of excerpt from Emmanuel Dreyfus