[openssl-project] platforms: what do the different "classes" mean?

[Matt Caswell]

On 10/01/18 22:32, Tim Hudson wrote:
> If you and or Matt are actively supporting it then it is "Secondary".

I usually don't even do it during a release these days. I used to but it
invariably failed and we invariably said that it wasn't a show stopper
and went ahead anyway. So now I don't even bother. I haven't attempted a
Cygwin build in a long time.

Matt



> If someone who is non-OMC, non-committer steps forward to say they will
> support it then it is Community.
> Otherwise it is Unknown (unless we plan to deprecate it).
> 
> I have no problem with you and/or Matt and/or any OMC or committer
> stepping forward to place Cygwin in the Secondary status. 
> But if you want it in Community then a community member has to step forward.
> 
> Although I do see that you could elect to make it Community because you
> support it but not "actively" - although that wasn't the intent at all -
> either a team member is supporting it or a community member is. 
> It wasn't intended to be a second-class level of team support.
> 
> Tim.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 8:17 AM, Richard Levitte <levitte at openssl.org
> <mailto:levitte at openssl.org>> wrote:
> 
>     Reading the platform policy
>     (https://www.openssl.org/policies/platformpolicy.html
>     <https://www.openssl.org/policies/platformpolicy.html>),
>     the classifications seems fairly clear.
> 
>         Primary: well defined
> 
>         Secondary: at least one team member actively supports
> 
>         Community: one or more member of the community supports
> 
>         Unknown: we have no idea what the status is
> 
>         Deprecated: to be removed later on
> 
>     And yet, we're bickering over what status Cygwin should have in PR
>     #5043 (https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/5043
>     <https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/5043>).  Why is that?
>     I'm guessing that we don't quite agree what "actively supports"
>     means.  Is the "active" part about declaration (someone solemnly
>     declaring "I will support Cygwin"), or is it about action and
>     behavioral patterns (we do know that a few team members look after
>     Cygwin, although perhaps not on a daily basis).
> 
>     (from my very personal point of view, I'd put Cygwin in the
>     "community" category, 'cause even if Matt and I do test OpenSSL on
>     Cygwin when we are the ones doing a release, that's also it as far as
>     I know...  but this isn't just about my opinion, and when opinions are
>     clearly diverging, it's time to ask why)
> 
>     Cheers,
>     Richard
> 
>     --
>     Richard Levitte         levitte at openssl.org <mailto:levitte at openssl.org>
>     OpenSSL Project         http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
>     <http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/>
>     _______________________________________________
>     openssl-project mailing list
>     openssl-project at openssl.org <mailto:openssl-project at openssl.org>
>     https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project
>     <https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openssl-project mailing list
> openssl-project at openssl.org
> https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project
>