selecting Use PGP/MIME for this message):
This is an error report about your vote [record msg00675.raw]
for the vote
Debian Project Leader 2007 Election Statistics
sent in on Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:17:24 +0200, with the subject
Re: Second call for votes for the debian project leader
vote [record msg00675.raw]
for the vote Debian Project Leader 2007 Election Statistics sent in
on Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:17:24 +0200, with the subject Re: Second call
for votes for the debian project leader election 2007 The message ID
is [EMAIL PROTECTED]. The folowing errors were reported
On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 22:02:18 +0200, Michal Čihař [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Maybe I read RFC 3156 wrong, but I think it says exactly what I
sent:
6.1. RFC 1847 Encapsulation
In [2], it is stated that the data is first signed as a
multipart/signature body, and then encrypted to form the
Hi
On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 02:21:48 -0500
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of your ballots (msg00250) did pass the gpg check -- but
you must have voted with the same ballot, since devotee says:
Failure: The signature on the message, though valid, has been seen
before.
On Sunday 01 April 2007 23:19, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
IIRC signing subkeys are not accepted at package uploads, so maybe
that's what you were thinking about.
AFAIK, they are.
Policy URLs are not accepted, that's what I was thinking
Hello
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:02:49 -0500
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It turns out that it was indeed encrypted, but the message was
not signed; which means there is no information about who is sending
the ballot. This is a legitimate addition to the ballot; I'll point
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 06:11:38PM +0200, Michal Čihař wrote:
It of course was signed, I simply don't know what went wrong, but it
seems that something fooled script which is handling votes (signature
won't verify, because I deleted the votes):
You had your message signed, then put the
Hello
On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 18:15:40 +0200
Steinar H. Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 06:11:38PM +0200, Michal Čihař wrote:
It of course was signed, I simply don't know what went wrong, but it
seems that something fooled script which is handling votes (signature
On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 18:11:38 +0200, Michal Čihař [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hello On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:02:49 -0500
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It turns out that it was indeed encrypted, but the message was not
signed; which means there is no information about who is sending
the
Hi
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 13:04:12 -0500
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is the most creative and weird action I have seen in the
last few elections.
You send an encrypted mail, which was not itself signed. This
caused the vote to be rejected. Now, the body of
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 01:04:12PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 18:11:38 +0200, Michal Čihař [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hello On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:02:49 -0500
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It turns out that it was indeed encrypted, but the message was not
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
IIRC signing subkeys are not accepted at package uploads, so maybe that's
what you were thinking about.
AFAIK, they are.
--
One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the
Scribit Steve Langasek dies 01/04/2007 hora 13:09:
Hrm, is there really an RFC that specifies encryption before signing?
AFAIK, the RFC specifies how to build an encrypted MIME body and a
signed body. When you want both, you can either store a signed body in
the encrypted one, or an encrypted
On Thursday 29 March 2007 06.24:52 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:52:33 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
You do not handle signing subkeys?
What makes you think that? Any key
On Friday 30 March 2007 08.47:53 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
OK, so please take this honest.
I don't think I have ever been dishonest about it. Amused,
perhaps, dishonest, no.
Language issue. s/honest/serious/
Admittedly, I'm guessing.
cheers
-- vbi
--
The young lady had an
Hi
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:23:28 +0200
Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you encrypt to yourself, how is the voting system supposed to decrypt
it?
It was encrypted for two keys, both of them can decrypt it.
You also encrypted to the key that was generated for this vote, which
looks
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 09:23:38 +0200, Michal Čihař [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hi On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:23:28 +0200
Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you encrypt to yourself, how is the voting system supposed to
decrypt it?
It was encrypted for two keys, both of them can decrypt it.
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:02:49 -0500, Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 09:23:38 +0200, Michal Čihař [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Hi On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:23:28 +0200
Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you encrypt to yourself, how is the voting system supposed to
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
3) do not accept DPLs with non-ASCI names. ;-))
Sure, if you think that is better than fixing broken MUAs.
I guess you missed the double smiley.
Well, no. I think it is funny that one should consider
eliminating us pesky people with
Hi
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:52:38 -0500
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This seems to indicate that the key was not in the keyring.
2048-bit ELG-E key, ID 43C42E9B, created 2007-03-09
__ gpg --homedir=. --keyring debian-keyring.gpg --keyring
debian-keyring.pgp
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On ke, 2007-03-28 at 14:57 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
just want to give my vote and concentrate on the rankings I want to give
and not learn about tools to submit my vote.
From memory (my shell history isn't long enough), here's what I did:
1.
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:21:00 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Well, Manoj, the initial mail contains a paragraph called:
HOW TO VOTE
The paragraph goes on to state that the way to vote is to send
a signed or encrypted ballot to an vote.debian.org email
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:44:46 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On ke, 2007-03-28 at 14:57 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
just want to give my vote and concentrate on the rankings I want
to give and not learn about tools to submit my
* Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-28 08:25:02 -0500]:
I think your options are to send in an ascii armored encrypted
ballot, or use mutt or gnus to send a proper PGP/MIME signed
ballot. Either should work.
It is really this simple to do using mutt.
1. To encrypt the
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:00:19AM +0200, Michal ?iha? wrote:
Hi
__ gpg --homedir=. --keyring debian-keyring.gpg --keyring
debian-keyring.pgp --with-colons --list-keys 0x05C78623
pub:-:1024:17:DC3552E836E75604:2004-01-10:::-:Michal ?x8ciha?x99 [EMAIL
PROTECTED]::scESC:
[...]
* Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-03-29 21:23:28 +0200]:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:00:19AM +0200, Michal ?iha? wrote:
Hi
__ gpg --homedir=. --keyring debian-keyring.gpg --keyring
debian-keyring.pgp --with-colons --list-keys 0x05C78623
On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 10:28:34 -0600, Oleksandr Moskalenko wrote:
It is really this simple to do using mutt.
1. To encrypt the vote you need to have the key. It could be accomplished in
several ways. They way I did it was by copying
from the call for votes email into a file such as foo.txt
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 01:35:52AM +0300, Guillem Jover wrote:
You might want to use ^K from inside mutt, instead.
Does that work if the key is attached or only for retrieving from a key
server when a mail has been signed with a key not already in your key
ring?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
...
In order to type the letter a, look on the keyboard (ask someone
...
Manoj, the answer you gave here does not fit the statistics you posted.
The statistics do show a problem and I'm a little bit frustrated that
you seem to make fun of it.
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:10:53 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
... In order to type the letter a, look on the keyboard (ask
someone ...
Manoj, the answer you gave here does not fit the statistics you
I have no idea
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:10:53 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
... In order to type the letter a, look on the keyboard (ask
someone ...
Manoj, the answer you gave here does not
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 08:23:10 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:10:53 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Sure, we have a problem.
OK, so
Hi
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:56:23 +0200
Bart Martens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 07:43 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
The relation between Rejects and Voters is currently the highest we
ever had. I'm just asking whether we need some technical improvement
here because I
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Ben Pfaff wrote:
However, this is the only ballot I recall containing
non-ASCII characters, which could be the cause.
Ahhh, this is a typical cause of problems. So we have three chances:
1) fix software that interprets incoming mails
2) issue an alternate ballot
Ben Pfaff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With Gnus+Mailcrypt, I was unable to vote with a signed but not
encrypted ballot. The voting daemon claimed that there was some
kind of quoted-printable problem. This surprised me: Gnus and
Mailcrypt have not caused problems for me with any previous
Kalle Kivimaa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ben Pfaff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With Gnus+Mailcrypt, I was unable to vote with a signed but not
encrypted ballot. The voting daemon claimed that there was some
kind of quoted-printable problem. This surprised me: Gnus and
Mailcrypt have not
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mailcrypt doesn't, as far as I know, support PGP/MIME (RFC 3156).
PGP/MIME is the only standards-conforming way to do OpenPGP signatures
containing non-ASCII text. Check your e-mail if it contains a
top-level Content-Type of multipart/signed. If it
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Andreas Tille wrote:
2) issue an alternate ballot where 'ë' in Raphaël is
simplified as 'e' (and we agree that this is the same
person as Raphaël)
For the record, I already authorized Manoj to do that. In fact, I don't
even recall how the accent got integrated
Le mercredi 28 mars 2007 09:31, Michal Čihař a écrit :
Same here, tried encrypted first, it failed (see bellow), then
unencrypted and it worked fine.
Precisly the same issue here.
It has been reported to work on mutt, and it failed here with kmail.
Is the crypt+sign mail format standard ?
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 12:12:55PM +0200, Romain Beauxis wrote:
Le mercredi 28 mars 2007 09:31, Michal ??iha?? a écrit :
Same here, tried encrypted first, it failed (see bellow), then
unencrypted and it worked fine.
Precisly the same issue here.
It has been reported to work on mutt, and
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 23:27:59 -0700, Ben Pfaff [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The relation between Rejects and Voters is currently the highest we
ever had. I'm just asking whether we need some technical
improvement here because I personally add a count of
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:12:55 +0200, Romain Beauxis [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Le mercredi 28 mars 2007 09:31, Michal Čihař a écrit :
Same here, tried encrypted first, it failed (see bellow), then
unencrypted and it worked fine.
Precisly the same issue here.
The issue there was using a
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:31:10 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Ben Pfaff wrote:
However, this is the only ballot I recall containing non-ASCII
characters, which could be the cause.
Ahhh, this is a typical cause of problems. So we have three
chances:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:31:10 +0200, Michal Čihař [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hi On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:56:23 +0200
Bart Martens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 07:43 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
The relation between Rejects and Voters is currently the highest
we ever had. I'm
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
My suggestion is to stop using mailcrypt, it is ancient, and
hoary; pgg and easypg work a lot better.
This is a case of non-functional MUA software.
Well, I have to admit that I do not want more or less than voting this
time as I did
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 08:05:27 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Bart Martens wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 07:43 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
The relation between Rejects and Voters is currently the highest
we ever had. I'm just asking whether we need
On ke, 2007-03-28 at 14:57 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
just want to give my vote and concentrate on the rankings I want to give
and not learn about tools to submit my vote.
From memory (my shell history isn't long enough), here's what I did:
1. Copy ballot to text file (vote.txt).
2. Edit it
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
1) fix software that interprets incoming mails
There is nothing wrong with the software that interprets
incoming mails; the mails that fail actually fail cryptographic
checks since they have been masssaged by the MUA/MTA afterwards,
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
1. Copy ballot to text file (vote.txt).
2. Edit it for my voting preference.
3. Sign with gpg: gpg --clearsign vote.txt
4. Send: mail -s vote vote.txt.asc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I work in a UTF-8 environment, in case that matters.
It might matter, so I
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 15:16 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
1) fix software that interprets incoming mails
There is nothing wrong with the software that interprets
incoming mails; the mails that fail actually fail cryptographic
checks
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Well, in either case, something intervened along the way (some
MTA) and protected the accented char after you had sent the mail.
The solution is to use a MYA that does properly do PGP/MIME --
or send in an encrypted ballot, which is
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 14:57:46 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
My suggestion is to stop using mailcrypt, it is ancient, and hoary;
pgg and easypg work a lot better.
This is a case of non-functional MUA software.
Well, I have
Le mercredi 28 mars 2007 15:16, Andreas Tille a écrit :
I'm obviousely hit by two broken MUAs (pine, mailx) and not
willing to spend more then 10 minutes just to send my vote.
Plus kmail I think.
Romain
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:16:15 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
1) fix software that interprets incoming mails
There is nothing wrong with the software that interprets incoming
mails; the mails that fail actually fail
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
The issue there was using a signing key not in the debian
keyring. If you are doing the same, please stop.
You do not handle signing subkeys? That would mean one has to add that
dreaded ! to the keyid, so as to make gpg not use any subkeys.
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:52:33 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
The issue there was using a signing key not in the debian
keyring. If you are doing the same, please stop.
You do not handle signing subkeys?
What
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The solution is to use a MYA that does properly do PGP/MIME --
or send in an encrypted ballot, which is base64 encoded, I think, and
should not trigger ther helpful MTA enroute.
I had to fall back on doing an encrypted ballot because I
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:47:09 -0700, Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Probably part of the problem is that I haven't yet figured out the
correct way to do PGP/MIME in Gnus (mostly because I haven't looked
very hard).
Here is what I use (I am using emacs23, but this should work
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 03:28:04PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:47:09 -0700, Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Probably part of the problem is that I haven't yet figured out the
correct way to do PGP/MIME in Gnus (mostly because I haven't looked
very hard).
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:52:33 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
You do not handle signing subkeys?
What makes you think that? Any key that is used needs to be
in the debian keyring, is all.
I just checked,
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
e0acebd2-71f1-4df8-ae4d-50355ad7aa81
[ 2 ] Choice 1: Wouter Verhelst
[ 9 ] Choice 2: Aigars Mahinovs
[ 6 ] Choice 3: Gustavo Franco
[ 3 ] Choice 4: Sam Hocevar
[ 3 ] Choice 5: Steve McIntyre
[ 1 ] Choice 6:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
===
|||Total # of| |Valid|Unique|Rejects|| Multiple ||
||Year|Developers|Quorum|Votes|Voters| |% Voting| of Quorum||
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 07:43 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
The relation between Rejects and Voters is currently the highest we
ever had. I'm just asking whether we need some technical improvement
here because I personally add a count of three to the rejects and
have no idea how to vote
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Bart Martens wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 07:43 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
The relation between Rejects and Voters is currently the highest we
ever had. I'm just asking whether we need some technical improvement
here because I personally add a count of three to the
Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The relation between Rejects and Voters is currently the highest we
ever had. I'm just asking whether we need some technical improvement
here because I personally add a count of three to the rejects and
have no idea how to vote successfully.
With
65 matches
Mail list logo
