About the current process to suggest trivial/cleanup changes

[Jaime Hablutzel]

What’s the simplest procedure available now for suggesting trivial or cleanup changes, to be processed later through a cleanup Ballot?

Is there anything in place that lets anyone propose changes via pull requests, have someone triage and label them (e.g., as “clean-up”), and then have them properly reviewed and (possibly) adopted under the regular cleanup Ballot process?

I think providing a lightweight process for suggesting changes—without requiring too much time (as in the standard PR workflow used in open-source projects)—would lead to faster improvements in document quality. I’ve lost count of the times that, while reading the documents, I’ve noticed minor, trivial things to improve; not having a quick way to report them has simply discouraged me from reporting in most cases.

I’ll be grateful for your opinions. The last thing I got on this was a Ryan Sleevi’s comment several years ago: https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/pull/322#issuecomment-938040108. That PR, labeled as “clean-up,” is still open, as are most of my other (almost) trivial PRs: https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/pulls/hablutzel1 (some of them may be outdated, though).

[Adriano Santoni]

I agree.

Adriano

Il 10/02/2026 20:39, 'Jaime Hablutzel' via Server Certificate WG (CA/B Forum) ha scritto:

[NOTICE: Pay attention - external email - Sender is servercert-wg+bncBCJ7NW5...@groups.cabforum.org ] 





What’s the simplest procedure available now for suggesting trivial or cleanup changes, to be processed later through a cleanup Ballot?

Is there anything in place that lets anyone propose changes via pull requests, have someone triage and label them (e.g., as “clean-up”), and then have them properly reviewed and (possibly) adopted under the regular cleanup Ballot process?

I think providing a lightweight process for suggesting changes—without requiring too much time (as in the standard PR workflow used in open-source projects)—would lead to faster improvements in document quality. I’ve lost count of the times that, while reading the documents, I’ve noticed minor, trivial things to improve; not having a quick way to report them has simply discouraged me from reporting in most cases.

I’ll be grateful for your opinions. The last thing I got on this was a Ryan Sleevi’s comment several years ago: https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/pull/322#issuecomment-938040108. That PR, labeled as “clean-up,” is still open, as are most of my other (almost) trivial PRs: https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/pulls/hablutzel1 (some of them may be outdated, though).

[Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)]

Hello Jaime,

The common practice is to create a GitHub issue, label it as clean-up, and ideally include proposed language. You might even start a new PR labeled "Cleanup 2026" :)

I'm not sure if the best course of action at this point is to add your proposed changes to the current SC095 ballot. I'd rather you open one or more issues that can be tackled in future clean-up ballots.

Hope that works.

Best regards,
Dimitris.

[Jaime Hablutzel]

Thanks Dimitris. 

So one currently valid workflow could be to create a PR (which makes it easier to suggest/discuss changes) and then create an Issue (labeled as 'clean-up') to simply link the PR?

Has it been considered to directly accept PRs instead of having to create (mostly redundant) Issues? GitHub uses the same number sequence for Issues and PRs and it even allows to list both PR and Issues at the same time, e.g. https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/issues?q=state%3Aopen

On 11 Feb 2026, at 4:45 AM, 'Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)' via Server Certificate WG (CA/B Forum) <server...@groups.cabforum.org> wrote:

 Hello Jaime,

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Server Certificate WG (CA/B Forum)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to servercert-w...@groups.cabforum.org.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/a/groups.cabforum.org/d/msgid/servercert-wg/425632b6-5025-4d07-a3cf-15766f21570c%40harica.gr.

[Dimitris Zacharopoulos]

I think it's best to use issues to be discussed. A PR is a step before the ballot.

What do others think?

Thanks,

DZ.

Feb 11, 2026 16:09:44 'Jaime Hablutzel' via Server Certificate WG (CA/B Forum) <server...@groups.cabforum.org>:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/a/groups.cabforum.org/d/msgid/servercert-wg/DB263637-1232-478C-A035-3FC90F3613CA%40wisekey.com.