I would suggest that this means we need to stick to letters for 5.3.1 for now, 
and remember to avoid making the same mistake in the future.

 

-Tim

 

From: Public <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dimitris Zacharopoulos 
(HARICA) via Public
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2019 10:35 PM
To: Wayne Thayer <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Bylaws 2.2 Pre-Ballot

 


I checked the IPR Policy to find any cross-references to the Bylaws that might 
be affected by the change of letters to numbers, and discovered that in section 
8.3 "Other Key Definitions", there is a definition under letter "l" that 
defines the term "Working Group" which references 5.3.1 (a) and 5.3.1 (e) of 
the Bylaws.

I'm not sure how we can overcome this. Is it clear to everyone that (a) 
corresponds to 1, (b) corresponds to 2 and so on?


Dimitris.



On 25/4/2019 1:53 π.μ., Wayne Thayer via Public wrote:

Some additional fixes have been made to the Bylaws document. Here is the latest:

 

https://github.com/cabforum/documents/blob/26b2432038dd5445a4ae8b5783a95bbacd4a4b95/docs/Bylaws.md

 

The changes are:

1. Fixed formatting of "Member" in the definitions section.

2. Changed the list formatting throughout the doc to comply with the quirky 
rules of markdown. Lists that used to be lettered are now numbered and vice 
versa.

3. Addressed side-effects of moving membership criteria out of section 2.1 and 
into the WG Charters. Here is the redline:

 

https://github.com/cabforum/documents/compare/930d568..26b2432

 

* We still vote in categories at the Forum level, so those category definitions 
are needed in the Bylaws. I added language that aligns Forum membership 
categories with CWG membership categories.

* Associate Member and Interested Party membership still happens at the Forum 
level. Added references to those membership types in section 2.1

 

This last change is significant, so I will appreciate everyone's review and 
comments. I now have two endorsers, so if there are no concerns with these 
changes we can begin the discussion period.

 

Thanks,

 

Wayne

 

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 3:55 PM Wayne Thayer <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

Below is a proposed ballot for the Bylaws updates that we have been discussing 
for some time.

 

As I mentioned on today's call, I have referenced the documents on GitHub in 
the body of the ballot rather than attaching PDFs as was done in the last major 
Bylaws ballot. I have used permalinks that preserve the exact version in the 
ballot, even if changes are later made to the branch. Please let me know if you 
have concerns with this approach.

 

I'm looking for one more endorser so that I can assign a ballot number and 
begin the review period.

 

I would also appreciate everyone's review of these changes - there are a lot of 
changes and thus opportunities for mistakes.

 

- Wayne

===========

 

Ballot Forum-#

 

Purpose of Ballot: The Forum has identified and discussed a number of 
improvements to be made to the current version of the bylaws to improve clarity 
and allow the Forum to function more effectively.

 

The following motion has been proposed by Wayne Thayer of Mozilla and endorsed 
by Dimitris Zacharopoulos of HARICA and XXX of YYY to amend the Bylaws of the 
CA/Browser Forum and the Server Certificate Working Group Charter.

 

— MOTION BEGINS –

1. Amendment to the Bylaws: replace the entire text of the bylaws with the 
following:

https://github.com/cabforum/documents/blob/52fd23441fe6933ce36bb7256d609534ccf1fc84/docs/Bylaws.md

 

2. Amendment to the Server Certificate Working Group Charter: replace the 
entire text of the SCWG Charter with the following:

https://github.com/cabforum/documents/blob/52fd23441fe6933ce36bb7256d609534ccf1fc84/docs/SCWG-charter.md

— MOTION ENDS –

 

*** WARNING ***: USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.  THE REDLINE BELOW IS NOT THE OFFICIAL 
VERSION OF THE CHANGES (CABF Bylaws, Section 2.4(a)):

A comparison of the changes can be found at: 
https://github.com/cabforum/documents/compare/master..bylaws2.2

The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:

Formal discussion period:  (14+ days)

Start time:   TBD UTC

End Time:  TBD UTC

Vote for approval (7 days)

Start time: TBD UTC

End time:  TBD UTC





_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

Reply via email to