On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 01:03 +0000, Bruce Stephens wrote: > It seems a bit overcomplex, though; what's the rationale for wanting > to call different keys by the same name anyway? Is it just the > limited namespace for keys (a restricted form of email address), or is > it just the upgrade issue?
Assuming one works on multiple projects (e.g. monotone and coLinux) then having separate keys with the same e-mail address does make sense to some degree. For example if the private key for one project is compromised then only that project needs to go to the trouble of revoking the key (and reviewing all changes signed with that key). Although if the keys were compromised by a single weak password or a bug in monotone then I guess it is likely that both private keys would be compromised at the same time. -- Daniel Thompson (STMicroelectronics) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1000 Aztec West, Almondsbury, Bristol, BS32 4SQ. 01454 462659 If a car is a horseless carriage then is a motorcycle a horseless horse? _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
