On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:42 AM, wrote:
> Author: toad
> Date: 2008-12-12 16:42:55 + (Fri, 12 Dec 2008)
> New Revision: 24272
>
> Modified:
> trunk/freenet/src/freenet/node/updater/NodeUpdater.java
> Log:
> Parse the manifest, identify the recommended and required ext versions for an
>
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Matthew Toseland
wrote:
> On Saturday 13 December 2008 03:03, Daniel Cheng wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:21 PM, Matthew Toseland
>> wrote:
>> > On Friday 12 December 2008 05:14, j16sdiz at freenetproject.org wrote:
>> >> Author: j16sdiz
>> >> Date:
rson???
>
> Once again, educating the user is the only way to go:
>
> Either by telling him who is the guy in charge of building the installer
> OR by telling him to ignore the warning.
>
> I do think that the first option is the best.
>
> > We have a master key from StartCom, which is not recognised by Java or by
most
> > browsers, but has the big advantage of costing $0.
> >
> > The SSL key is derived from the master key.
>
> No, we don't have what you call a "master key"; They didn't sign our CA
> as a sub CA.
>
> > If I build a copy of the installer on emu, it is signed using my key which
is
> > kept on emu and I believe is derived from the master key.
> >
> > A real code signing key in the name of the Freenet Project Inc would cost
on
> > the order of $500 a year.
>
> I'm not arguing we should invest $ into getting a signed certificate. I
> am sure we have professional developers here who do have a valid,
> trusted certificate.
Whom we can trust? Such as?
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/5b785156/attachment.pgp>
ext attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/4c37eec7/attachment.pgp>
Ian Clarke skrev:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Zero3 wrote:
>
>> Matthew Toseland skrev:
>>
>>> Disruptive person or not, nextgens has contributed far more to the Freenet
>>> project than you have, and I don't want to have to take on administering emu
>>> unless he gets hit by a
Ian Clarke skrev:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Zero3 wrote:
>
>> If you actually want people to volunteer, may I kindly suggest that you
>> guys agree internally on how Freenet is supposed to move forward first?
>>
>
> That is what we are doing right now.
>
> You might think this
Matthew Toseland skrev:
> Issues for the installer. Both Zero3 and nextgens seem to have decided to
> sulk, so I'll arbitrarily decide these issues where there is deadlock and if
> anyone objects he can reply to this thread with a reasoned argument.
>
>
I'm not sulking as in "to express ill
User's rather than
Administrator's) it should break in wierd ways (your original proposal), or
cause a major security breach (using a group).
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/5d5c0c4e/attachment.pgp>
al
*are* possible.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/1abe16b6/attachment.pgp>
s nextgens has explained, it could be my box. It
would make it much easier to automate the process, and thereby enable us to
provide a bundle-installer which is updated on new stable builds.
Theoretically this could be done on Windows ...
>
> > I believe the above decisions are practically implementible and should
annoy
> > nextgens and Zero3 to equal degrees.
> >
>
> I hope that's just meant as a joke... :-/
It was not intended as a joke at the time.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/a8dcbfc0/attachment.pgp>
> FPI than any other active volunteer developer, although lately he has been
> sulking and talking about leaving. His views have to be taken into account.
> But so do Zero3's, especially if nextgens keeps to his repeated threat of
> leaving.
I'm not threatening about anything: I told you that I have reconsidered
my involvment with the project and in practice that means I'm spending
less time on it.
Now if most of it is wasted argueing over things I took for granted and
understood by everyone, I might re-reconsider my position and vanish
completely, yes.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/e27556c0/attachment.pgp>
Matthew Toseland skrev:
>> If you actually want people to volunteer, may I kindly suggest that you
>> guys agree internally on how Freenet is supposed to move forward first?
>>
>
> We are trying to!
>
> Disruptive person or not, nextgens has contributed far more to the Freenet
> project
pen to have one.
>
> Anyway, because of liability concerns, and our fast diverging views of what
the
> installer should be and should provide, I am not willing to sign the
installer
> anymore.
Okay, so as far as keys go:
Some versions of the installer were signed by your private code-signing key.
These would have worked most transparently, with least warnings, however they
have the problem that the signing party is not the freenet project - who is
this Florent Daigniere person???
We have a master key from StartCom, which is not recognised by Java or by most
browsers, but has the big advantage of costing $0.
The SSL key is derived from the master key.
If I build a copy of the installer on emu, it is signed using my key which is
kept on emu and I believe is derived from the master key.
A real code signing key in the name of the Freenet Project Inc would cost on
the order of $500 a year.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/3eae7717/attachment.pgp>
.
> >
> > I have valid certificates; I used them for signing the java installer
> > but I am obviously not going to sign those windows binaries.
>
> I thought they were only valid for websites?
Not my personal certificate.
> That real code signing certs that the JVM
o-install of the JVM if necessary, thus easier for windows users.
> > - Much simpler than the current installer in the sense of far fewer
stages.
> > CON:
> > - Can't be signed on emu unless somebody comes up with an open source exe
> > signing tool ... does Wine provide one? In any case a real code signing
cert
> > is expensive, gpg-signing the exe is probably the easiest way to establish
a
> > real trust path.
>
> I have valid certificates; I used them for signing the java installer
> but I am obviously not going to sign those windows binaries.
I thought they were only valid for websites? That real code signing certs that
the JVM will take seriously cost mucho $ ?
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/ef26296d/attachment.pgp>
gt;
>
> I believe the above decisions are practically implementible and should annoy
> nextgens and Zero3 to equal degrees.
>
> QUOTE:
> "Consensus is the process by which comrades are alienated by constant
> argument
> until there is only one person remaining, who can then glory in being right."
>
> (Okay I just made that up)
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/b6b3f78f/attachment.pgp>
s bars, with the
last indicated as such.
>
> Bombe
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/952a4b01/attachment.pgp>
pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/0296eb23/attachment.pgp>
nt (make sure you test
it though).
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/cab473df/attachment.pgp>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/3702250c/attachment.pgp>
/emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/516b4b27/attachment.pgp>
eptable.
And I would just like to point out again that nextgens has done a lot more for
FPI than any other active volunteer developer, although lately he has been
sulking and talking about leaving. His views have to be taken into account.
But so do Zero3's, especially if nextgens keeps to his repeated threat of
leaving.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/f3ed956d/attachment.pgp>
next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/637c0764/attachment.pgp>
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:21 PM, Matthew Toseland
wrote:
> On Friday 12 December 2008 05:14, j16sdiz at freenetproject.org wrote:
>> Author: j16sdiz
>> Date: 2008-12-12 05:14:32 + (Fri, 12 Dec 2008)
>> New Revision: 24233
>>
>> Modified:
>>trunk/plugins/XMLSpider/XMLSpider.java
>> Log:
fety, deserve
> neither Liberty nor Safety. - Ben Franklin
>
>
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/4964f2e5/attachment.pgp>
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Zero3 wrote:
> If you actually want people to volunteer, may I kindly suggest that you
> guys agree internally on how Freenet is supposed to move forward first?
That is what we are doing right now.
You might think this kind of discussion is messy, but its how
Ian Clarke skrev:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Florent Daigni?re
> wrote:
>
>> I don't care what you'd say. You are pushing for infrastructure changes
>> to be made: you are the one making demands here. The policy is what it
>> is: special cases suck and should be avoided. It's not like
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081213/d47e738e/attachment.pgp>
On Saturday 13 December 2008 00:27, Zero3 wrote:
Ian Clarke skrev:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Florent Daignière
nextg...@freenetproject.org wrote:
I don't care what you'd say. You are pushing for infrastructure changes
to be made: you are the one making demands here. The policy
On Friday 12 December 2008 23:07, Florent Daignière wrote:
I'm not really trying to discuss how the builds should be signed
(another discussion really),
No, it's not. THEY SHOULD NOT BE SIGNED ON EMU EITHER! and it's not
because we are doing it wrong at the moment that we should extend
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Matthew Toseland
t...@amphibian.dyndns.org wrote:
On Saturday 13 December 2008 03:03, Daniel Cheng wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:21 PM, Matthew Toseland
t...@amphibian.dyndns.org wrote:
On Friday 12 December 2008 05:14, j16s...@freenetproject.org wrote:
Issues for the installer. Both Zero3 and nextgens seem to have decided to
sulk, so I'll arbitrarily decide these issues where there is deadlock and if
anyone objects he can reply to this thread with a reasoned argument.
1. Whether we should remove all the questions from the current installer,
On Saturday 13 December 2008 12:21, Matthew Toseland wrote:
3. Whether to compile and sign the current installer on emu.
Nextgens has suggested that we should sign the installer elsewhere. The
bytecode could still be verified provided that the dev who builds it builds
it with appropriate
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:42 AM, t...@freenetproject.org wrote:
Author: toad
Date: 2008-12-12 16:42:55 + (Fri, 12 Dec 2008)
New Revision: 24272
Modified:
trunk/freenet/src/freenet/node/updater/NodeUpdater.java
Log:
Parse the manifest, identify the recommended and required ext
On Saturday 13 December 2008 13:12, Daniel Cheng wrote:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:42 AM, t...@freenetproject.org wrote:
Author: toad
Date: 2008-12-12 16:42:55 + (Fri, 12 Dec 2008)
New Revision: 24272
Modified:
trunk/freenet/src/freenet/node/updater/NodeUpdater.java
Log:
On Saturday 13 December 2008 11:58:30 Matthew Toseland wrote:
IMHO this will allow us to turn off the 2MB file size limit, this is one of
the big gains here, but it means it could be fetching for some time.
In addition to “we’re loading something” we could also show “we’re loading
some large
On Saturday 13 December 2008 13:53, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
On Saturday 13 December 2008 11:58:30 Matthew Toseland wrote:
IMHO this will allow us to turn off the 2MB file size limit, this is one
of
the big gains here, but it means it could be fetching for some time.
In addition to
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Zero3 ze...@zerosplayground.dk wrote:
If you actually want people to volunteer, may I kindly suggest that you
guys agree internally on how Freenet is supposed to move forward first?
That is what we are doing right now.
You might think this kind of discussion is
* Matthew Toseland t...@amphibian.dyndns.org [2008-12-13 12:21:01]:
Issues for the installer. Both Zero3 and nextgens seem to have decided to
sulk, so I'll arbitrarily decide these issues where there is deadlock and if
anyone objects he can reply to this thread with a reasoned argument.
On Saturday 13 December 2008 16:11, Florent Daignière wrote:
* Matthew Toseland t...@amphibian.dyndns.org [2008-12-13 12:21:01]:
Issues for the installer. Both Zero3 and nextgens seem to have decided to
sulk, so I'll arbitrarily decide these issues where there is deadlock and
if
anyone
Matthew Toseland skrev:
If you actually want people to volunteer, may I kindly suggest that you
guys agree internally on how Freenet is supposed to move forward first?
We are trying to!
Disruptive person or not, nextgens has contributed far more to the Freenet
project than you have,
In any case we are NOT protected from the compromise of emu nor by the
compromise of the key used to sign the installer.
Exactly. Right now we build both the installers and the jars on emu. If emu
is
compromised, it can supply bogus installers and bogus jars. If we move the
building
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Zero3 ze...@zerosplayground.dk wrote:
Matthew Toseland skrev:
Disruptive person or not, nextgens has contributed far more to the Freenet
project than you have, and I don't want to have to take on administering emu
unless he gets hit by a bus. Therefore we have
Matthew Toseland skrev:
Issues for the installer. Both Zero3 and nextgens seem to have decided to
sulk, so I'll arbitrarily decide these issues where there is deadlock and if
anyone objects he can reply to this thread with a reasoned argument.
I'm not sulking as in to express ill humor
Ian Clarke skrev:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Zero3 ze...@zerosplayground.dk wrote:
If you actually want people to volunteer, may I kindly suggest that you
guys agree internally on how Freenet is supposed to move forward first?
That is what we are doing right now.
You might
Ian Clarke skrev:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Zero3 ze...@zerosplayground.dk wrote:
Matthew Toseland skrev:
Disruptive person or not, nextgens has contributed far more to the Freenet
project than you have, and I don't want to have to take on administering emu
unless he gets
On Saturday 13 December 2008 17:22, Florent Daignière wrote:
In any case we are NOT protected from the compromise of emu nor by the
compromise of the key used to sign the installer.
Exactly. Right now we build both the installers and the jars on emu. If
emu is
compromised, it can
* Ian Clarke ian.cla...@gmail.com [2008-12-12 17:56:59]:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Florent Daignière
nextg...@freenetproject.org wrote:
I don't care what you'd say. You are pushing for infrastructure changes
to be made: you are the one making demands here. The policy is what it
is:
On Saturday 13 December 2008 18:19, Matthew Toseland wrote:
On Saturday 13 December 2008 17:40, Zero3 wrote:
Matthew Toseland skrev:
Issues for the installer. Both Zero3 and nextgens seem to have decided
to
sulk, so I'll arbitrarily decide these issues where there is deadlock
and
if
On Saturday 13 December 2008 16:15:32 Matthew Toseland wrote:
In addition to “we’re loading something” we could also show “we’re
loading some large file and we’re already done 85%.
Exactly. We can show the size and type of the file, we can show either one
progress bar which jumps about or a
* Matthew Toseland t...@amphibian.dyndns.org [2008-12-13 18:01:03]:
On Saturday 13 December 2008 17:22, Florent Daignière wrote:
In any case we are NOT protected from the compromise of emu nor by the
compromise of the key used to sign the installer.
Exactly. Right now we build
On Saturday 13 December 2008 18:45, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
On Saturday 13 December 2008 16:15:32 Matthew Toseland wrote:
In addition to “we’re loading something” we could also show “we’re
loading some large file and we’re already done 85%.
Exactly. We can show the size and type of
On Saturday 13 December 2008 18:57, Florent Daignière wrote:
* Matthew Toseland t...@amphibian.dyndns.org [2008-12-13 18:01:03]:
On Saturday 13 December 2008 17:22, Florent Daignière wrote:
In any case we are NOT protected from the compromise of emu nor by
the
compromise of the key
53 matches
Mail list logo
