Thanks for your added comments, Frank.
I agree that b.m.o has different categories of bugs, some of which are
purely technical in nature, and others of which may not be. As long as
the maintainers of b.m.o have no problem with the potential volume of
traffic caused by advocacy comments in non-technical categories of
b.m.o, then I don't have any problem there either.
I would like it, though, if NSS bugs could be kept free of advocacy,
as much as possible, which is why I suggested not turning bugs that
contain such advocacy into NSS bugs. I'd guess that the owners of
most technical parts of mozilla would feel similarly.
I would also hope that the policy would ultimately be sufficiently
detailed detailed and objective that the process of determining whether
a given CA meets that criteria or not would be relatively cut-and-dried,
without a lot of room for advocacy.
In my copious free time, I am working on a questionare for CAs that I
hope will help us to formulate that policy, and may help CAs to provide
concise answers to help us determine if they meet it.
--
Nelson B
_______________________________________________
mozilla-crypto mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto
