Le 30 octobre 2011 14:12:20 Pierre Schmitz a écrit :
> Hi all,
>
> it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
> properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
> signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign that
> one using maste
On 31 October 2011 01:56, Daniel Isenmann wrote:
> I'm building my packages exclusive on pkgbuild.com and there I can't
> sign packages. If we do the switch in dbscripts then pkgbuild.com
> should be ready to generate signed packages. As far as I know it isn't
> possible yet, am I right?
>
> Other
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
> properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
> signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign that
> one using mas
On 30 October 2011 22:47, Daniel Isenmann wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:58:35 +0100
> Tom Gundersen wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Daniel Isenmann
>> wrote:
>> >> I don't think signing remotely is going to be possible, also I
>> >> don't see the point of it. We anyway have to dow
[2011-10-30 14:12:20 +0100] Pierre Schmitz:
> If you just agree with all this send a +1.
I agree with all this.
--
Gaetan
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:58:35 +0100
Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Daniel Isenmann
> wrote:
> >> I don't think signing remotely is going to be possible, also I
> >> don't see the point of it. We anyway have to download the package
> >> in order to test it, so we wouldn't
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Daniel Isenmann wrote:
>> I don't think signing remotely is going to be possible, also I don't
>> see the point of it. We anyway have to download the package in order
>> to test it, so we wouldn't really gain anything.
>
> Not all packages have to be tested, e.g. a
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:32:25 +0100
Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Daniel Isenmann
> wrote:
> > As it seems that there is no real solution here, I will try to do it
> > like Florian and Giovanni said it. Downloading the package, sign it
> > locally and upload the signatur
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Daniel Isenmann wrote:
> As it seems that there is no real solution here, I will try to do it
> like Florian and Giovanni said it. Downloading the package, sign it
> locally and upload the signature to pkguild again.
>
> Nevertheless we should find a solution to bu
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 19:50:43 +0100
Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Am 30.10.2011 19:13, schrieb Daniel Isenmann:
> > On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 19:04:51 +0100
> > Giovanni Scafora wrote:
> >
> >> Il 30/10/2011 18:56, Daniel Isenmann ha scritto:
> >> > I'm building my packages exclusive on pkgbuild.com and the
Am 30.10.2011 19:13, schrieb Daniel Isenmann:
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 19:04:51 +0100
> Giovanni Scafora wrote:
>
>> Il 30/10/2011 18:56, Daniel Isenmann ha scritto:
>> > I'm building my packages exclusive on pkgbuild.com and there I can't
>> > sign packages. If we do the switch in dbscripts then pk
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:12:20 +0100
Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
> properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
> signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign
> that one using
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 19:04:51 +0100
Giovanni Scafora wrote:
> Il 30/10/2011 18:56, Daniel Isenmann ha scritto:
> > I'm building my packages exclusive on pkgbuild.com and there I can't
> > sign packages. If we do the switch in dbscripts then pkgbuild.com
> > should be ready to generate signed packa
Il 30/10/2011 18:56, Daniel Isenmann ha scritto:
I'm building my packages exclusive on pkgbuild.com and there I can't
sign packages. If we do the switch in dbscripts then pkgbuild.com
should be ready to generate signed packages. As far as I know it isn't
possible yet, am I right?
You can build
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 14:12:20 +0100
Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
> properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
> signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign
> that one using
Am 30.10.2011 14:12, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
> Hi all,
>
> it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
> properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
> signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign that
> one using master keys i
On 30 October 2011 14:14, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 30.10.2011 14:12, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
>> To speed things up I'd like to let dbscripts enforce signed packages.
>> This means that from now on no new packages can be uploaded that don't
>> have a signature.
>
> +1
>
>> We may give the TU a ew
On 30.10.2011 14:12, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> If you just agree with all this send a +1.
+1
PS: we should get a voting system
--
Florian Pritz
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 02:12:20PM +0100, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
> properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
> signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign that
> one
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Giovanni Scafora
wrote:
> Il 30/10/2011 14:12, Pierre Schmitz ha scritto:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
>> properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
>> signing the package itself.
Il 30/10/2011 14:12, Pierre Schmitz ha scritto:
Hi all,
it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign that
one using master keys is a dif
On Sunday 30 October 2011 14:12:20 Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
> properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
> signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign that
> one using m
On 30 October 2011 14:22, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 30/10/11 23:12, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
>>
>> If you just agree with all this send a +1.
>
> +1
>
Sounds good.
--
Guillaume
Am 30.10.2011 14:12, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
> To speed things up I'd like to let dbscripts enforce signed packages.
> This means that from now on no new packages can be uploaded that don't
> have a signature.
+1
> We may give the TU a ew days mroe time as this will be
> new to them.
-1 - they
On 30/10/11 23:12, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
If you just agree with all this send a +1.
+1
Hi all,
it's about time to finalize our signing policy to get all our packages
properly signed as soon as possible. Note that this is just about
signing the package itself. How we will manage our keyring and sign that
one using master keys is a different story.
At first please have a look at
http
26 matches
Mail list logo
