Am Mittwoch, 30. September 2015, 08:42:38 schrieb Ian: > I'm not opposed to using signing if we can do it without keeping the > project stuck in 2001's development tools - because that will pretty-much > guarantee its slow death.
Are we actually stuck in 2001’s development tools? I see up-to-date eclipse, JDK 7 and 8, C# for the Windows installer, distributed version control, Python3 for the new site, release messages autogenerated from the history, ... We have up to date Bouncy Castle and Florent has been working again and again at replacing old custom cypto with current standards. There might be some tools which are not up to date, but that’s either because no one took it up, or because the benefit does not outweight the cost (we have to update all contributors to the new system, and we have quite diverse development setups). There are more important things to do — like getting the debian package working again. And for that, using proven though sometimes a bit clunky systems is an advantage. Best wishes, Arne
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
