* Philipp Kern <pk...@debian.org> [2013-06-07 12:26:37 +0200]: > On 2013-06-06 21:42, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: > >Well, I don't think adding more kruft to dak is a great idea (I > >mean, if > >it has to happen, it has to happen), but this really shows that we need > >a unified way of passing machine-readable messages between services. > > > >Let's see how the GSoC project turns out; I'm willing to bet even a > >proof of concept would be useful to services that interdepend so > >closely. > > > >I mean, not to play the "UNIX" card, but one thing well, you know? > >Let's > >just aid in the code talking to each other better. > > Oh yeah, if you give us secure and reliable(!) messaging over > unreliable and untrusted networks, in way that DSA accepts, I would > be very happy. ;-)
Hi, Secure should be pretty straightforward as every message is already cryptographically signed. I think most of the work (save from packaging) will be on the reliability side, as Fedora's infrastructure is more tightly integrated than ours. The "accepted by DSA part" is a bit complicated. We didn't really want to bother one of the busiest teams in Debian when the software wasn't even packaged, and, when it came up, I felt that the reception of the idea of using fedmsg was a bit lukewarm. I think we should be able to work things out when and if we have a working proof of concept. > [snip] Cheers, -- Nicolas Dandrimont BOFH excuse #88: Boss' kid fucked up the machine
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
