-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 227
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
Replace juju/ratelimit with x/time/rate #800
Conversation
Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project (if not, look below for help). Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). 📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign. Once you've signed (or fixed any issues), please reply here with What to do if you already signed the CLAIndividual signers
Corporate signers
ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info. |
1 similar comment
Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project (if not, look below for help). Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). 📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign. Once you've signed (or fixed any issues), please reply here with What to do if you already signed the CLAIndividual signers
Corporate signers
ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info. |
"Your first contribution to a Google open source project"... 🤣 /gcbrun |
Looks like you, er, need to sign the CLA? |
Yup, just blocked on legal for a moment. |
Let's resurrect this PR. |
/gcbrun |
ac0909b
to
7cd367f
Compare
The consequences of the LGPL static linking exception in juju/ratelimit aren't terribly well understood, and it's the only component in the certificate-transparency chain that's not under something well-studied like MIT or Apache. There's now ratelimit support in x/time, so porting over to use that instead simplifies licensing analysis.
/gcbrun |
@mjg59 The check still stays you haven't signed the CLA. Please do if you would still like this PR submitted. I rebased it on top of the current master so that it has no conflicts. |
CLA should now be signed |
Oh I see my corp email address isn't on file. I'll deal with that in the morning, sorry! |
@googlebot I signed it! |
@mjg59 Looks like the bot finally believed you, thanks :) |
The consequences of the LGPL static linking exception in juju/ratelimit
aren't terribly well understood, and it's the only component in the
certificate-transparency chain that's not under something well-studied like
MIT or Apache. There's now ratelimit support in x/time, so porting over to
use that instead simplifies licensing analysis.
Checklist