Matt Caswell

> OTC: do we want this CI build given the conditions mentioned above? OTC: This PR would be acceptable if djgpp was a community maintained platform @jwt27 - are you...

This adds a new platform. We can only accept new platforms if there is someone from the community willing to step forward as the community maintainer for that platform (i.e....

> I see, didn't read that. so this can't/won't be merged until someone willing to mantain the platfrom comes in(?). Correct. Unless you fancy volunteering for the job yourself, or...

> My bad, i thought this was a trivial enough commit, in case, how to resubmit with that? Details on how to submit a CLA are here: https://www.openssl.org/policies/cla.html Once your...

Nice summary @pimterry > if there's any chance that changes to the 3 points above might be accepted? I see no reason why they wouldn't be. They all seem like...

I think this was closed in error.

> Is just compiling in CI to be enough for secondary? Or does it also need to run the test suite? From the definition of secondary: > A platform that...

I have no particular strong view on this. I have no objection to reviewing a proposal.

I actually think this is the wrong fix. Co-incidentally I've been looking at this again recently. Updated fix coming soon.

Closing this in favour of #24042, #24043 and #24044. Those PRs include and extend the commits from this PR.