Daniel McCarney
Daniel McCarney
> What I think we should do in rustls-ffi, is allow the caller to specify which crypto provider they want to use. That's more of what I had in mind...
> I feel like the better way forward here would be to follow through on https://github.com/rustls/rustls/issues/1372#issuecomment-1816537477 I'm not sure I understand how that proposal improves this situation. Can you expand...
> the CryptoProvider construction API feels like a separate API surface, which is more clearly specialized compared to the config builder API. I can see what you mean & that...
> I feel like the better way forward here would be to follow through on https://github.com/rustls/rustls/issues/1372#issuecomment-1816537477 in 0.22 instead of postponing it out to 0.23. Here's a PR implementing the...
@quininer If you had time this branch might be interesting to you as someone that has done a lot of work on rustls-tokio. Any feedback you could share would be...
@ctz @djc What needs to happen to move this forward? Is there a reason to defer the merge until a later date?
> I tried to apply some of my renaming propositions on a [branch](https://github.com/Wonshtrum/rustls/tree/message-types-rename) of my repo. > .. > I implemented the modified enum_builder on this branch: https://github.com/Wonshtrum/rustls/tree/message-types-rename. > .....
> cpu closed this 1 minute ago Sorry, hit a button by mistake :sweat:
> We would do that in the context of this PR, based on your original commits, so you would continue to be recorded as the author. Apologies for not waiting...
> It pushes the logic introduced by the renaming even further, I would understand if you don't like it. May I push it here when rebased (it should not take...