Re: [Gnu-arch-users] crypto signing take 2

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Robert Collins <address@hidden>

    > On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 08:59, Tom Lord wrote:

    > > Really I have no objection to working it back in later.  It just isn't
    > > needed to have useful functionality and I'm not clear about why it
    > > would be important.   What "cute things" do you have in mind?

    > The ones I described mainly: dynamically resigning an archive as you
    > mirror it - perhaps to sign unsigned archives, or to note that a given
    > maintainer is listed as having checked all the code.

Dynamic resigning will be the behavior under this proposal -- it's not
resigning that would require special handling of push-mirror.

The idea of multiple maintainers "signing off" on some piece of code
is a good one -- but I don't think it belongs at this level.   Arch's
contribution there is just the namespace so that, in some ancillary
tool, people can say "so-and-so has signed off on patch-254".


    > >     > (Oh, archive-fs.c is -just about- dead here
    > >     > (address@hidden/tla--gpg--1.1)

    > > Wow, that's good news!

    > patch-2 is committed, mirrored and passes make test. Thats not to say
    > that it's gold... but if you'd like to mirror and play....

Soon.

-t