OTC VOTE: Accept PR#16725

[Nicola Tuveri]

I believe Matt will find the time at some point to post the minutes
from today's meeting, but until then here is my recap.

The discussion mostly focused on why the changes in #16725 are a
bugfix and not a new feature, which would be a prerequisite to be
admissible to be merged in the 3.0 branch.
As I recall it, there were no objections to the final outcome of the
PR to be desirable, the vote is entirely about this being a bugfix or
not.

It would be on those who voted +1 to properly argument why this is a
bugfix and not a new feature, but the short version of that argument
is that the outcome of #16725 was the "intended behavior" for 3.0.0.
The counterargument is that we could not find written evidence (i.e.,
GH issues/PRs, documentation, and/or tests) that indeed the project
ever committed to have this behavior in 3.0.0.


The Strategic Architecture document has some text that could be
somewhat related and used to support the "intend behavior" view, but
the document clearly states

> This document outlines the OpenSSL strategic architecture. It will take multiple releases, starting from 3.0.0, to move the architecture from the current "as-is" (1.1.1), to the future "to-be" architecture.

Hence, it does not really prove that this functionality was always
planned for the 3.0.0 release.

Accepting this PR for the next minor release would not require a vote.



I hope this recap is helpful to inform your decision.



Cheers,

Nicola

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 9:10 PM Kurt Roeckx <kurt at roeckx.be> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 11:07:26AM +0100, Matt Caswell wrote:
> > topic: Accept PR#16725 as a bug fix for backport into 3.0 subject to the
> > normal review process
>
> So we have various people voting -1. Does someone want to explain
> why they vote -1?
>
>
> Kurt
>