Richard Levitte

`EVP_MD_CTX_md_data()` isn't, and shouldn't be relevant for provider interfaces. It's a legacy construct. The corresponding thing for provider implementations is the provider-side digest context, and should be expected to be...

Do note that the pointer returned by `EVP_MD_CTX_md_data()` was also a blob private to the backend that populates it.

> Its not about transferring it to other provides, it is to to save the state and continue at a alter time (on the same provider). In that case, `EVP_MD_CTX_dup()`...

Not sure what you heard there, @paulidale... me, I heard an offer to help build and test on some sort of regular basis.

That is to say, one doesn't preclude the other.

> For the cross compiled platforms, we don't currently run the suite on every PR (it takes way way too long with qemu) but we do run them when merging....

> I'm not so happy about an XXX VM running on a YYY cpu being sufficient to claim XXX is supported. Er... why not? It's not like I want to...

There are still some policies that haven't been moved

> Do you think it makes sense to parse the webhook payload and get commit data from it? It does parse the webhook payload to find the patch URL. However,...

Should it clear that label if someone makes a "request changes" review later on (within the 24h grace time)?