On May 26, 2026, at 08:30, Martin Thomson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Inclusion as a contributor is a strictly factual statement.
Exactly. > On that last point, it's probably worth a note saying that a document should > acknowledge when a contributor strongly disagrees with something in a > document. In the best case, that would be snapshot of the thinking of the contributor at the time of publication. > In retrospect, (QED.) > I really wish that I could disendorse much of RFC 6772, despite thinking that > the small parts I wrote still hold up well. I don’t think a document should make any statement of endorsement/disavowal trying to speak for a contributor. (Oh, you say that as an author of RFC 6772, which amplifies my point of these positions being somewhat ephemeral.) Grüße, Carsten -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
