[OTC VOTE PROPOSAL] Don't merge PR#14759 (blinding=yes and similar properties)
Dr Paul Dale
pauli at openssl.org
Fri Apr 9 11:52:44 UTC 2021
We don't need a vote on the PR.
If we make the policy vote, it would be against policy to include it.
On 9/4/21 9:24 pm, Nicola Tuveri wrote:
> I agree with what Tomàš said, and that is the reason why I convoluted
> them in a single vote: we need to merge or reject the PR based on a
> policy, but if we do 2 separate votes we risk to create delays in the
> already quite loaded development cycles left!
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021, 10:53 Tomas Mraz <tomas at openssl.org
> <mailto:tomas at openssl.org>> wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 08:44 +0100, Matt Caswell wrote:
> > On 08/04/2021 18:02, Nicola Tuveri wrote:
> > > Proposed vote text
> > > ==================
> > >
> > > Do not merge PR#14759, prevent declaring properties
> similar to
> > > `blinding=yes` or `consttime=yes` in our implementations and
> > > discourage 3rd parties from adopting similar designs.
> > I think this vote tries to cover too much ground in a single
> vote. I
> > would prefer to see a simple vote of "Do not merge PR#14759"
> > *possibly*
> > followed up by separate votes on what our own policies should be
> > provider implementations, and what we should or should not encourage
> > 3rd
> > parties to do.
> I disagree partially. IMO we should primarily have a policy vote and
> the closing or merging of PR#14759 should come out of it naturally.
> Tomáš Mráz
> No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
> Turkish proverb
> [You'll know whether the road is wrong if you carefully listen to your
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openssl-project