Re: [openpgp] Requesting the editor to step down

Hi group,
While it’s almost the same and (mostly) duplicates contents of the previous messages, it adds links to some closed issues in GnuPG bug tracker.
Those seems to be closed absolutely logically, since were pointing to unsupported configurations/non-release GPG versions.
And I don’t think we should mix together development of some project(s) with work on internet draft.

Best regards,
	Nickolay Olshevsky
	o.nickolay@gmail.com

...
>  - We created an interoperability test suite [0].  This test suite
>    has been successful in identifying problems in many OpenPGP
>    implementations.  We reported the problems that we found in the
>    different implementations, and the response was almost universally
>    positive.  The exception was the GnuPG project, where Werner
>    outright dismissed any findings ([1], [2]).  Now, Werner is free
>    to dismiss contributions in his personal project, but this alone
>    should raise some red flags.
> 
>    0: https://tests.sequoia-pgp.org/
>    1: https://dev.gnupg.org/T4725
>    2: https://dev.gnupg.org/T4727
> 
> However, as editor of the RFC, he cannot treat contributors to OpenPGP
> as he treats potential contributors to GnuPG, e.g., closing bug
> reports with the reason "spite" [3].  The recent addition of the "key
> block" subpacket to RFC4880bis which he committed on the same day as
> the implementation in GnuPG suggests that Werner thinks that he has
> the authority to change the standard like he changes GnuPG.  Changing
> the standard should be a group effort, which we tried to engage in,
> but were blocked by Werner.
> 
>  3: https://dev.gnupg.org/T4904
> 
...
> 
> For the Sequoia-PGP team,
> Justus
> _______________________________________________
> openpgp mailing list
> openpgp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp