On 13/12/2014 jan i wrote:
8.1 and above, it complains when you start the exe after installation.
To people who were waiting for developments in this discussion: a new
one ("Digital signing release for windows") has been started, so please
follow it and I'll post my replies there too. See als
installation.
rgds
jan i
>
> - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:r...@robweir.com ]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 15:56
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org ; Dennis Hamilton
> Subject: Re: Signing AOO 4.1.1 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter)
>
&
, December 9, 2014 15:56
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: Signing AOO 4.1.1 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter)
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
wrote:
[ ... ]
> I don't understand why full rebuilds are required. The only crucial file
> that ne
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 08:29
> To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
> Subject: Re: Signing AOO 4.1.1 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter)
>
> On 9 December 2014 at 16:26, Dennis E. Hamilton
> wrote:
>
is also desirable, especially since we are starting
from zero using the signing process.
-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 08:29
To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: Signing AOO 4.1.1 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter)
On 9 December 2014
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:21 PM, jan i wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 9, 2014, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>> > wrote:
>> > I don't know if this is helpful or not. I'm not in a position to check.
>> >
>> > Thinking out loud:
>> >
>> > There are two cases
On Tuesday, December 9, 2014, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> > wrote:
> > I don't know if this is helpful or not. I'm not in a position to check.
> >
> > Thinking out loud:
> >
> > There are two cases of signatures.
> >
> > 1. Digital signing of installab
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
wrote:
> I don't know if this is helpful or not. I'm not in a position to check.
>
> Thinking out loud:
>
> There are two cases of signatures.
>
> 1. Digital signing of installable components, such as DLLs and such. This
> is also important bu
any time pressure and can provide signed
> binaries from the beginning, so teething and preserving the knowledge may
> be easier.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 00:17
> To: dev@openoffice.apa
so teething and preserving the knowledge may be easier.
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2014 00:17
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Signing AOO 4.1.1 (was RE: Budapest and thereafter)
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
On Tuesday, December 9, 2014, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 09/12/14 09:17, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> > Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >> We had a signing mechanism in place for a long time and the reason why
> >> we have currently no digital signing is the lack of a certificate where
> >> we as project (PM
On 09/12/14 09:17, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> We had a signing mechanism in place for a long time and the reason why
>> we have currently no digital signing is the lack of a certificate where
>> we as project (PMC) or as representative the release manager have enough
>> contr
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
We had a signing mechanism in place for a long time and the reason why
we have currently no digital signing is the lack of a certificate where
we as project (PMC) or as representative the release manager have enough
control.
I do have a certificate and access key to the si
On 09/12/14 03:29, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> I don't know if this is helpful or not. I'm not in a position to check.
>
> Thinking out loud:
>
> There are two cases of signatures.
>
> 1. Digital signing of installable components, such as DLLs and such. This
> is also important but a second-
14 matches
Mail list logo
