Re: Signing key repository

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 at 01:17, Craig Russell wrote: > > Hi Sebb(TEST) > > > On Feb 18, 2024, at 16:18, sebb wrote: > > > > On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 at 23:46, sebbaz(Test) > > wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 at 17:14, Craig Russell wrote: > >>> > >>> As you might hav

Re: Signing key repository

Hi Sebb(TEST) > On Feb 18, 2024, at 16:18, sebb wrote: > > On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 at 23:46, sebbaz(Test) > wrote: >> >> On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 at 17:14, Craig Russell wrote: >>> >>> As you might have notices, we received an SGA signed with a GPG key. Whimsy >>> verif

Re: Signing key repository

On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 at 23:46, sebbaz(Test) wrote: > > On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 at 17:14, Craig Russell wrote: > > > > As you might have notices, we received an SGA signed with a GPG key. Whimsy > > verified the key but as far as I can see, the filing process did not store > > the key in the reposito

Re: Signing key repository

On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 at 17:14, Craig Russell wrote: > > As you might have notices, we received an SGA signed with a GPG key. Whimsy > verified the key but as far as I can see, the filing process did not store > the key in the repository. Note that all the sig checks are done in the same routine,

Signing key repository

As you might have notices, we received an SGA signed with a GPG key. Whimsy verified the key but as far as I can see, the filing process did not store the key in the repository. Perhaps we should change the name of the key repository to reflect that any of several documents might be signed, and