Sync with domain dnssec restructure #58
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Member
|
I think I already got all of that the in the adaption of the signzone PR. |
Contributor
Author
|
Maybe, but currently everything fails to build on main, so this is just a PR to unblock merging other stuff. The signzone PR is 4000 lines, so it might take a while to review and merge. |
Contributor
Author
|
Nevermind, you're talking about another PR. I'll take a look there. |
Contributor
Author
|
Dupe of #55 |
Contributor
Author
|
#55 actually did not merge to main, so reopening this. |
tertsdiepraam
force-pushed
the
sync-with-domain
branch
from
efc2732 to
a50a3ef
Compare
bal-e
approved these changes
Apr 15, 2025
Contributor
bal-e
left a comment
bal-e
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good, @tertsdiepraam.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Should be mostly straightforward, but I might have made some mistakes. I'd like this to be review by @Philip-NLnetLabs at least.
This is somewhat of a blocker to #8, which should also get the same treatment. Also blocking #24 which breaks currently as well.