Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cacert-policy - Re: Results of Audit session 2015.1

Subject: Policy-Discussion

List archive

Re: Results of Audit session 2015.1


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Eva Stöwe <eva.stoewe AT cacert.org>
  • To: cacert-policy AT lists.cacert.org
  • Subject: Re: Results of Audit session 2015.1
  • Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 06:16:35 +0200
  • Organization: CAcert

Dear Ian,

On 15.08.2015 18:06, Ian G wrote:
> On 15/08/2015 12:11 pm, Benny Baumann wrote:
>> For example there was a proposal for Policy on Policy to loosen the form
>> requirement of the policy documents to only cover the policy text (and
>> structure).
>
> Where is this?

At the start of the year I proposed some updates for the Policy on
Policies. I only posted the first part of the PoP here, so that we would
not discuss the complete document in one go. So it may be that that part
was not covered back then (even as it was part of what I wanted to propose).

This was countered / discarded by Benny. So there was no chance to get
to a near consensus (few other people did join), this was dropped.

Afterwards, the next discussions, was about how to get rid of that
restriction (because issues to get policy updated from software), but
nothing was brought forward as a proposal for a policy change.

If you like to, I can bring forward a proposal with some more updates to
the PoP that I really think would be necessary (also with regard to the
previous discussion that was started because of the ruling in
a20150114.2). But I probably will not be able to do this properly before
mid of next week, because I am currently on an event.

(Actually I would prefer to have some more time, because my personal
time table is currently quite full until mid September, but I probably
can free some time, somehow.)

>> Also there has been for nearly half a year where Policy Group could get
>> independent policy-wise from the Software Team thus you' just need to
>> modify the place to find policies and loosen the format requirements and
>> you can have changes up and running as fast and often as you want. The
>> system to host this is already available.
>
>
> Where is this, too?

As far as I know I have access to it.

But we should update the policy first, because only this change would
allow us to move it away.

kind regards,
Eva Stöwe

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of Page