When pq key agreement was added in 2019, it took almost 3 years for it to become enabled by default. This isn't criticism, just an observation. I don't have a pressing need for pq sigs. Always happy for new OpenSSH releases though!
The draft was only published a few months ago:
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-sshm-mldsa44-e...
The draft is a 'personal document', so not associated with the IETF/WG.
Anyone know if these projects accept PRs to improve these kinds of things, like legibility? Or is it a point of pride?
https://github.com/openbsd/www/commits/master
My experience is that minor improvements tend to get accepted if they come with a solid technical motivation. If the change is simply justified by "best practices" and is rather large, then the conservative choice of just leaving things as they are usually prevail.
For example, I think I have seen two proposals for major overhauls of the OpenBSD.org homepage by "outsiders" over the last three years or so and they were both rejected. However, as you can see by the commit log, minor improvements (including presentation ones) happen all the time.
<!--
DO NOT EDIT MANUALLY! This is generated from:
www/build/openssh/releasenotes.html.head
www/build/openssh/releasenotes.html.tail
See comments in www/build/openssh/Makefile for details.
-->* https://man.openbsd.org/ssh_config.5#MACs
* https://man.openbsd.org/sshd_config.5#MACs
ETM, encrypt-than-mac, variants are at the front of the preference list.