Please write respectfully on this list (Re: PQC public key format specification)

[Bernhard Reiter]

Am Dienstag 13 Februar 2024 19:19:06 schrieb andrewg via LibrePGP-discuss:
> Was this in the spirit of the OpenPGP way of doing things?
> It's certainly arguable that it  was not and
> that we shouldn't repeat that mistake. 

> On 2024-02-13 17:43, Werner Koch wrote:
> > Pretty please no OpenPGP WG discussion style and don't accidentally
> > trick us getting into this either. See the rules posted at
> > https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/librepgp-discuss/2023/000000.html
> > (copied below)
>
> I'm unsure how to "avoid a discussion style as introduced around 2018 in
> the OpenPGP working group mailing list".

My take on it:
Do not presume what is or was a mistake or a good spririt and what wasn't.
The first quote above can be understood this way.

Instead some could present a more concrete argument or a specific question.
Assume that implementors and designers had a good reason (or may have made a 
specific oversight). If you say that arguments can be made, make them or 
refer to them.

I believe that rules are okay to ask for a technical mailinglist
and to occasionally remind or address the issue.

> So I will refrain from further comment, just in case.

I welcome further comments of you 
as I find the vast majority of your writing constructive in style and 
contents. What the rules mean in a case at hand will have to developed 
anyway, so you can just try and we'll figure it out.

Best Regards,
Bernhard
-- 
https://intevation.de/~bernhard   +49 541 33 508 3-3
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, DE; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998
Geschäftsführer: Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://librepgp.org/pipermail/librepgp-discuss/attachments/20240214/118bc783/attachment.sig>