[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 301: Don't include package fingerprints in consensus documents



> On 14 Mar 2019, at 03:50, Iain Learmonth <irl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Signed PGP part
> Hi,
> 
>>> On 25/02/2019 23:30, teor wrote:
>>>> Looks good to me, let's merge it as an "accepted" proposal?
> 
> This is now proposal 301.
> 
> What is the process by which this becomes "accepted"? Is this just a
> matter of someone making that commit?

Here's what "Accepted" means:

   Accepted: The proposal is complete, and we intend to implement it.
      After this point, substantive changes to the proposal should be
      avoided, and regarded as a sign of the process having failed
      somewhere.

https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/proposals/001-process.txt#n152

I can't imagine us making any substantive changes to the proposal.

The reasons and actions are clear, and there are clearly-defined sub-tickets
for each of the tasks. We have successfully implemented similar tasks before.

Unless anyone objects in the next week, let's make this change:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/29776

T

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev