Petter Reinholdtsen dijo [Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 11:44:49AM +0200]: > [Joerg Jaspert] > > Thats exactly why you should use caff. It is *LESS* work to not > > upload keys while you sign them then.. > > Not for me, as both on the sending side (I do not have a machine both > capable of sending email and signing keys), and on the receiving side > (the machine I read email should not have my GPG key) I get extra > work. And I have enough tasks on my todo list already, so I do not > plan to work on changing any of that. :)
In fact, I have not yet processed most of the signatures as the machine where I read my mail does not have access to my new key — No worries, though, I will upload them from my work machine... soon :-) As for signing, I need only to have a machine able to relay mail out. That's quite easy to get. On machines with (semi-)permanent connection, I suggest you take a look at esmtp. All the signatures I sent were sent using that, from a no-local-mail machine. Using caff instead of manually uploading does not make it less burdensome for you all by itself - although signing and sending tens of signatures is done by running a single command, and it is really painless. Yes, you have to intervene manually to fetch+send your newly received signatures, but that's something we are all getting used to ;-) Besides, you cannot control how other people send you their signatures (hence Christian's mail). And parsing/processing a mbox is quite automatizable! So, use caff. Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated. Greetings, -- Gunnar Wolf • [email protected] • (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 _______________________________________________ Debconf-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-discuss
