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 1Q2ur9-0006x8-5U for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:26:23 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C64711C14C; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:26:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-iy0-f181.google.com (mail-iy0-f181.google.com [209.85.210.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F2AF1C147 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:25:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iyb26 with SMTP id 26so648698iyb.40 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:25:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0bIlSrUzwIdfY2ih52YD2WSDrq+Z1ALYibCz4g3zlGg=; b=U20dJRNAqYFYNRvXO4nv24EI0jeLYH7P1EFhicHKejAA4lYxqGgUIXd60V/D9JfjUF sG9QyL4irT9es8noHMOK27g5f0BqdIBeXG49cIdIPYV5z8Z3JQPddC0Y+Bxj5Ef3FiFk OIOryWvcz1Z6emgka0B64K48aUwuXSGLdhdzs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=IC1td8YcKxXv+p/vO9dimpBnudZRagnh8ZRuiJTcRsGSxGicwOdi2KXluD/9qaiG8f KUxlK4sYKlH9WT+M6XHg1Ngl0mnVHwgySgCw23icchR3rUchjrGGFBtQjgVMGspI/eCJ ppdP1Jh7ZNZ2Z/vlU/bCn2UDeco1UCjRoM+c8= Received: by 10.42.133.72 with SMTP id g8mr231464ict.80.1301012750089; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:25:50 -0700 (PDT) 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 Sender: vapierfilter@gmail.com Received: by 10.231.11.195 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:25:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110325002124.GA23059@hrair> References: <1301004533.2896.3.camel@TesterTop4> <20110325002124.GA23059@hrair> From: Mike Frysinger Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 20:25:30 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: KBMK5JM0CRL1OAtTSZbHNpKhF0Q Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rejecting unsigned commits To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 12a4f09dfde1998782117f3faca81f6f On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 06:08:53PM -0400, Olivier Cr=EAte wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 17:59 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> > is there any reason we should allow people to commit unsigned >> > Manifest's anymore ? =A0generating/posting/enabling a gpg key is >> > ridiculously easy and there's really no excuse for a dev to not have >> > done this already. >> >> I didn't know we still allowed that.. I guess the CVS server should just >> reject unsigned Manifests.. > > Reject, and email an alias of folk who will go fix the manifest. =A0Keep > in mind since it's a two stage commit for cvs, the checksums are left > out of sync if we just flat out reject unsigned manifests and ignore > the fallout. the fallout is said dev fixes their setup or they lose commit access i dont expect the rejection to go into effect $now, so people not signing have plenty of time to start doing so -mike