On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 21:07:54 +0100,
Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>
> Hi Pauli,
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 09:34:40PM +1000, Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> > The OMC vote is closed.
> >
> > The vote text being:
> >
> > The legacy provider should be disabled by default in 3.0
> >
> > With the clarification
My abstain vote was a carefully considered neutral stance backed
by many paragraphs of rationale.
The gist of which is that given that the decision to load or not
the provider is in the configuration file, the party ultimately
making the decision is whoever packages the software, not the
OpenSSL
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 06:57:49AM +1000, Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> I’m not sure what more I can write.
>
> I proposed the vote text around the time I sent the notification here: no
> comments.
> I created the vote, early in the voting period, the clarification was sought
> and made.
> All OMC
I’m not sure what more I can write.
I proposed the vote text around the time I sent the notification here: no
comments.
I created the vote, early in the voting period, the clarification was sought
and made.
All OMC members registered their vote and the vote closed early.
The criteria for being
Hi Pauli,
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 09:34:40PM +1000, Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> The OMC vote is closed.
>
> The vote text being:
>
> The legacy provider should be disabled by default in 3.0
>
> With the clarification that "disabled" in this context means "not loaded”.
>
> The vote passed (two for,
