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 1Qo0Ou-0001fC-C0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 21:52:07 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9CF5721C292; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:51:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 168C121C3DC for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:51:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.2.2] (dslb-084-058-145-158.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.58.145.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: patrick) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F071641FF for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:51:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4E371FD4.1040407@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 23:51:16 +0200 From: Patrick Lauer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110720 Thunderbird/5.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Preparations Council meeting 2011-08-09 References: <20110729175513.GA20656@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20110729175513.GA20656@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: cb85cb70b49c12b6194f972dbc7fbcdb On 07/29/11 19:55, Fabian Groffen wrote: > With a bit more than a week ahead of us for the next council meeting, > I'd like to start preparing the agenda, given that current practice > still is to send it out a week in advance. A small thing which I've brought up for discussion twice (and both times it was mostly ignored), but which I'd really like to see discussed or even agreed on: A simple policy making signed commits mandatory, plus a simple policy on key length, permissible encryption/signature algorithms, and a well-defined place where (public) keys are made available for verifying and checking the validity of the signatures. It would greatly improve the current status quo and remove any ambiguity which might motivate people to use a 4-bit key for signing to be within the letter of the law. Thanks, Patrick