search

openssl / technical-policies

Mirror of the repository for technical policies, governed by the OTC (OpenSSL Technical Committee)
20 stars 32 forks source link

Vote: Accept PR#18407 for backfit to 3.0 as a policy exception. #52

Closed romen closed 2 years ago

romen commented 2 years ago

The topic of this vote is: Accept PR#18407 for backfit to 3.0 as a policy exception.

The snippet below records the current votes as cast during the weekly OTC meeting (2022-05-31) during which the vote was called. The vote is still open.

Topic: Accept PR#18407 for backfit to 3.0 as a policy exception.
Proposed by: Nicola
Issue link: https://github.com/openssl/technical-policies/issues/52
Public: yes
Opened: 2022-05-31
Closed: 
Accepted:    (for: , against: , abstained: , not voted: )

   Dmitry     [+1]
   Matt       [-1]
   Pauli      [+1]
   Tim        [ 0]
   Richard    [ 0]
   Shane      [-1]
   Tomas      [ 0]
   Kurt       [  ]
   Matthias   [-1]   (corrected)
   Nicola     [+1]
tmshort commented 2 years ago

-0 from @mspncp ?

t8m commented 2 years ago

-0 from @mspncp ?

Yes, it is possible to vote -0 0 or +0. This is abstention with inclination against or for vote.

mspncp commented 2 years ago

-0 from @mspncp ?

@tmshort please also note that I like your proposed change and consider it an improvement. I'm just inclined against backporting it because I think we should not lightheartedly undermine our own stable-release-updates policy, which we published only recently:

grafik

But you are right, -0 was an indecisive vote. So instead of leaving the decision up to Kurt who hasn't voted yet, I changed my mind and vote explicitly against it:

mspncp commented 2 years ago

Vote: [-1] (corrected)

mspncp commented 2 years ago

...instead of leaving the decision up to Kurt who hasn't voted yet...

Well, the vote still depends on @kroeckx's outstanding vote. Which proves that the ability to count properly is not a strict requirement for becoming a mathematician ;-)

kroeckx commented 2 years ago

Voting -1

romen commented 2 years ago

-0 from @mspncp ?

@tmshort please also note that I like your proposed change and consider it an improvement. I'm just inclined against backporting it because I think we should not lightheartedly undermine our own stable-release-updates policy, which we published only recently:

grafik

But you are right, -0 was an indecisive vote. So instead of leaving the decision up to Kurt who hasn't voted yet, I changed my mind and vote explicitly against it:

Although openssl/openssl#18407 adds exactly 0 new tests or test cases, so we are not really voting an exception for that part of the policy, rather because we are considering this a new feature (not in the library or binaries, but in the test suite).

I plan to close the vote tomorrow (unless someone else does it sooner) in case there are changes of opinions.

tmshort commented 2 years ago

Kurt voted -1; the sum() is -1, so the vote does not pass. I will close #18407 since it has already been merged to master.

romen commented 2 years ago

I forgot to record this vote as closed, fixing it now:

Topic: Accept PR#18407 for backfit to 3.0 as a policy exception.
Proposed by: Nicola
Issue link: https://github.com/openssl/technical-policies/issues/52
Public: yes
Opened: 2022-05-31
Closed: 2022-06-07
Accepted: no (for: 3, against: 4, abstained: 3, not voted: 0)

   Dmitry     [+1]
   Matt       [-1]
   Pauli      [+1]
   Tim        [ 0]
   Richard    [ 0]
   Shane      [-1]
   Tomas      [ 0]
   Kurt       [-1]
   Matthias   [-1]
   Nicola     [+1]