From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1R9IBG-0003FQ-Iv for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:05:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 557C921C300; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:05:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gold.linx.net (gold.linx.net [195.66.232.40]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08AB221C2F7; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 15:04:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gold.linx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E1DB100E5; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:04:48 +0100 (BST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at linx.net Received: from gold.linx.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gold.linx.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id DlAZNDGQMCg4; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:04:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from [IPv6:2a01:40:21:2:5e9a:d8ff:fee0:64e9] (unknown [IPv6:2a01:40:21:2:5e9a:d8ff:fee0:64e9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tony@linx.net) by gold.linx.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CFFCD100E0; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:04:47 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4E848916.7010002@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:04:54 +0100 From: "Tony \"Chainsaw\" Vroon" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/6.0.2 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org CC: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest signing References: <4E848879.2050100@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4E848879.2050100@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 1e80151ec38f8a4407da9f2b77f4817b On 29/09/11 16:02, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > Is there any chance that we can agree to reject > unsigned manifests? Possibly a question for the Council to adjudicate? I am happy to back a mandatory signing policy for the main gentoo-x86 tree. This is a simple yes or no question that the council can vote on. Regards, Tony V.