Subject: [openpgp] Magnus Westerlund's No Objection on charter-ietf-openpgp-02-03: (with COMMENT)

From: Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 04:47:15 -0800

Magnus Westerlund has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-openpgp-02-03: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-openpgp/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What is the definition of un-interested party? By reviewing are they not
sufficiently interested to be an "interested party"?

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 13:02:28 +0000

Hi Magnus,

On 17/12/2020 12:47, Magnus Westerlund via Datatracker wrote:
> What is the definition of un-interested party? By reviewing are they
> not sufficiently interested to be an "interested party"?

There are various groups of people that are more or less
loosely or tightly associated with specific implementations
so we wanted to make it clear that such a group piling on
for a thing they really like (perhaps for good reason) isn't
sufficient for adoption. I don't think it'd be useful to try
define that more precisely as we'd get it wrong and maybe
just irritate people, so best I can see it'll have to depend
on WG chair judgement as to which reviews count that way or
not.

Cheers,
S.

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:33:34 +0000

Hi,

Understood, maybe there are some other word that could be used that better
express this aspect. Something for people to consider. 

Cheers

Magnus