Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Warn more explicitly about RFC5054 compatibility #13

Open
awakecoding opened this issue Jul 26, 2019 · 0 comments
Open

Warn more explicitly about RFC5054 compatibility #13

awakecoding opened this issue Jul 26, 2019 · 0 comments

Comments

@awakecoding
Copy link

I have integrated this SRP6a implementation in my code base in 2017, only to realize now that it never was interoperable with the RFC5054 standard. I don't recall if the note was explicit enough back then, but even today, most people will default to using the master branch. Instead of a soft "NOTE" in the readme, this should be some sort of scary warning that can't be missed.

I understand the point of maintaining backwards compatibility for older implementations that used this code before RFC5054, but shouldn't the master branch conform to RFC5054, with a pre-RFC5054 compatibility branch instead of the other way around? It's not like people fetch the code directly from the master branch every single time they build their project.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant