On Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 5:53:28 PM UTC-7, Matt Palmer wrote: > It seems fairly dysfunctional if a single member of the CA/B Forum can > prevent a ballot from going ahead.
To be clear: That is not the same as what I said. No single member can prevent a ballot going forward - but it can be enough to discourage someone from proposing/progressing on a ballot due to not feeling strongly enough. You can see an original proposal raised on https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2016-March/006933.html (which I referred to earlier). There was interested in proposing a ballot, but that interest waned with Symantec's objections. A clean-up ballot was attempted by Peter Bowen; his goal was to only include non-controversial aspects, so that it would clean up significant portions of ambiguous text. When Symantec raised concerns (thereby making it "controversial"), Peter withdrew that text from his ballot, rather than seeing it go to the full Forum. So someone can still propose a ballot to address this, and Symantec cannot prevent this (as you suggest); merely, no one has done so, in light of the objections - thus, the discussion has stalled (what I said). _______________________________________________ dev-security-policy mailing list dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
