On Sat, Oct 23, 1999 at 07:03:41AM +0000, Alexander Koch wrote: > On Fri, 22 October 1999 23:19:48 -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > The real problem is that having a maintainer address > > that is not referenced in the key ring is, IMO, bad. > > So for example for zebra the Maintainer is > Maintainer: Endre Hirling and Alexander Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > which is not in the keyring, I was signing it with my key > which at least has [EMAIL PROTECTED] in it. > > This will not be possible any more? Or do I misunderstand > something here?
No, it's possible, nothing was changed about this. That's an interesting case I hadn't thought about. What Brian was refering to was having say "Ben M. Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" as the maintainer field, but signing it with "B. Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>", which could be solved by simply adding the first ID to the key. I'll admit though, the case you show (and now that I think of it, several similar cases where the package might be maintained by a group) would benefit from such a feature). Ben
