On Thursday, September 29, 2011 11:11:59 Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 09/29/11 17:04, Tony "Chainsaw" Vroon wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> As previously discussed it would be nice to have some basic key policies
> in place for that - they can be changed at any later time, but for now
> we could agree on basic parameters like, say -
> 
> at least 1024bit key length
> at least 6 months validity from creation
> one or more algorithms (initially DSA signatures and SHA1 hashing)

there's nothing to decide as it was already outlined long ago in the docs:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=6

if you want to *refine* that, then that's a different issue.  but the devs 
already have all the info they need to start signing now.
-mike