= Patches awaiting an ACK =

 * Patches that fix [https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/ticket/125 ticket #125] (holding back 2.2.1 release)
  * [http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.network.openvpn.devel/4729 Introduction to the patchset]
   * [http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.openvpn.devel/4781 Updated "easy-rsa" for OpenSSL 1.0.0]
   * [http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.openvpn.devel/4780 Made domake-win builds to use easy-rsa/2.0/openssl-1.0.0.cnf]
   * [http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.network.openvpn.devel/4729 Fixes to easy-rsa/2.0]
 * [http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.network.openvpn.devel/4740 OpenVPN Doxygen patchset]
 * [http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.network.openvpn.devel/4764 OpenSSL crypto function refactoring patchset]
 * [http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=27714628 IPV6_RECVPKTINFO vs. IPV6_PKTINFO]

= MinGW buildsystem =

The "domake-win" / MinGW buildsystem is somewhat outdated. For example, build scripts need to be modified to work with latest software dependencies, such as OpenSSL 1.0.0 and lzo 2.05. There are also some inconsistencies in how it behaves, such as looking for OpenSSL DLL's sometimes from $OPENSSL_DIR, sometimes for $PREBUILT/openssl. We also have another fully functional [BuildingOnWindows Windows buildsystem] used to make official OpenVPN releases. A few questions:

First, should we try to actively maintain the MinGW buildsystem, provided nobody is filing bug reports or making complaints? Or should we let users who need it provide patches as necessary?

= OpenSSL 0.9.6 support =

OpenVPN still supports OpenSSL 0.9.6. Last 0.9.6 release [http://www.openssl.org/source/ was made in 2004]. Is there any reason ''not'' to remove the unused 0.9.6 codepaths a.s.a.p.?