Closed dcousens closed 9 months ago
@calvinmetcalf should be ready to merge straight up
Happy to ignore, I simply thought it was misleading ... 3 years ago.
lol fair, and to be clear i'm not opposed to landing this - just trying to understand it.
I think the intent was, with the current code reflecting so little of the original (see https://pajhome.org.uk/crypt/md5/sha256.html to compare with https://github.com/browserify/sha.js/blob/9b74ad04c1bdc28e557a85a30da3720f11fe33ca/sha256.js), it seemed appropriate to not imply that this code is representative of the other in respect to a code version et cetera.
However, the code is of course derived, which is important for attribution, but, it's in no way "Version 2.1a" or "Version 2.2-beta".
gotcha. unfortunately since you deleted the fork there's no way to recover this PR :-( but if you think it's important and you wanted to open a new one (with some text more like "adapted from v2.whatever") then we can land that.
I made the mistake of opening the cursed https://github.com/pulls
Maybe I'll open a new fork in a year or two
This code has changed far beyond Paul Johnston's original code, it feels misleading to hint at
Version 2.2-beta
or anything similar. I think this header is appropriate and hopefully adheres to the LICENSE requirements?