Hi Akhil > > Can we promote the Asym APIs to stable now?
+1 for it > > Regards, > Akhil > > > > > On 07/09/2021 12:45, Akhil Goyal wrote: > > >>> Do you think all the asym APIs are not eligible for promoting it > > >>> to stable > > >> APIs? > > >>> I haven't seen any changes for quite some time and we cannot have > > >>> it experimental Forever. > > >>> The APIs which you think are expected to change, we can leave them > > >>> as experimental And mark the others as stable. > > >> We could potentially make capability related functions stable but > > >> for others there are still some many uncertainties, another example: > > >> Ecdsa op expects 'k' in "in the interval (1, n-1)", openssl pmd > > >> will not even have function that accepts 'k' (although optionally > > >> inverse of k yes), what should user put then here? > > >> > > >> This API needs more attention I believe, I can send patches for it > > >> after 21.11 release. > > >> My opinion is that we should push all this by another year. > > >> > > > Ok will drop this patch for now. > > > > > > > Look since everyone is in alignment here, I am going to ask the symbol > > bot to ignore the asym crypto APIs for the next year. Thanks for the > > diligence on this, and thanks to Fan for sending me an FYI. > > > > Ray K
