What's the latest status on this?
Thanks,
Jacob
On 2017-07-21 15:51, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
On 2017-07-20 18:15:00, Philipp Kern wrote:
On 07/17/2017 09:41 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
Let's not jump the gun here. We're not shipping NSS in
ca-certificates,
just a tiny part of it: one text file, more or less.
Yeah, and the consensus of the
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 04:47:23PM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> On 2017-07-21 22:19:20, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > My point was that you state what your delta is and essentially boils
> > down to attach the diff of what will actually happen to the .deb. I
> > think it's generally fine to add new
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:03:22PM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 09:51:45AM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> > On 2017-07-20 18:15:00, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > > On 07/17/2017 09:41 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> > >> Let's not jump the gun here. We're not shipping NSS
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 09:51:45AM -0400, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> On 2017-07-20 18:15:00, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > On 07/17/2017 09:41 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> >> Let's not jump the gun here. We're not shipping NSS in ca-certificates,
> >> just a tiny part of it: one text file, more or less.
>
On 2017-07-21 22:19:20, Philipp Kern wrote:
> My point was that you state what your delta is and essentially boils
> down to attach the diff of what will actually happen to the .deb. I
> think it's generally fine to add new CAs and remove fully distrusted
> ones, instead of saying "it should
On 2017-07-20 18:15:00, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 07/17/2017 09:41 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>> Let's not jump the gun here. We're not shipping NSS in ca-certificates,
>> just a tiny part of it: one text file, more or less.
>
> Yeah, and the consensus of the world external to Debian seems to be
On 07/17/2017 09:41 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> Let's not jump the gun here. We're not shipping NSS in ca-certificates,
> just a tiny part of it: one text file, more or less.
Yeah, and the consensus of the world external to Debian seems to be that
this might not be the smartest choice.
> Also,
On 2017-07-07 16:02:51, Guido Günther wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 03:57:35PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> On 07/06/2017 08:01 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>> > In looking at fixing #858539 (blocking WoSign and StartCom, in CC) for
>> > wheezy, I noticed the issue was also pending in jessie.
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 03:57:35PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 07/06/2017 08:01 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> > In looking at fixing #858539 (blocking WoSign and StartCom, in CC) for
> > wheezy, I noticed the issue was also pending in jessie. Furthermore, the
> > idea originally raised by
On 07/06/2017 08:01 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> In looking at fixing #858539 (blocking WoSign and StartCom, in CC) for
> wheezy, I noticed the issue was also pending in jessie. Furthermore, the
> idea originally raised by pabs[1] was to also update the packages for
> the latest changes in
On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> For what it's worth, my opinion is that we should attempt to synchronize
> certdata.txt (and blacklist.txt, for that matter) across all suites (but
> not other changes to the packaging). This would remove another decision
> point in our
Hi everyone,
In looking at fixing #858539 (blocking WoSign and StartCom, in CC) for
wheezy, I noticed the issue was also pending in jessie. Furthermore, the
idea originally raised by pabs[1] was to also update the packages for
the latest changes in certdata.txt in wheezy, including the ISRG Root
13 matches
Mail list logo
