Follow-up Comment #3, sr #106651 (project administration):
Why was the summary changed? "Savannah should use CAcert.org-signed SSL
certificates" is not what I filed at all. Please change it back to what it was
since I apparently can't change the summary myself.
This is not FUD. FUD is for things that don't have any facts backing them up
at all. CAcert.org itself has shown that these problems do indeed exist. You
can't honestly just ignore this.
On a completely separate issue, is using a CA root not in most browsers
really the best thing for Savannah? It just adds yet another hoop people have
to jump through in order to get to free software and help out the community.
There are other CAs (such as StartSSL - www.startssl.com) that offer Web of
Trust things similar to CAcert.org but have wider acceptance in the browser
world, if that's what you find appealing.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/support/?106651>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
