I updated it in id.apache.org, which autogenerates [1], which should be the 
canonical source for our KEYS file. Give it a check in ~1 hour or so should be
all good.

Cheers,
Chris



[1] https://people.apache.org/keys/group/oodt.asc



On 7/23/17, 5:33 PM, "Sean Kelly" <ke...@apache.org> wrote:

    That did the trick.
    
    I'll be +1 if you also update the KEYS file.
    
    Transcript:
    
    fatalii 298 % date -u
    Mon Jul 24 00:32:49 UTC 2017
    fatalii 299 % gpg --verify apache-oodt-1.1-src.zip.asc
    gpg: Signature made Wed Jul 19 13:57:50 2017 CDT using RSA key ID 0C1E654B
    gpg: Good signature from "Chris Mattmann (CODE SIGNING KEY - Apr 2016) 
    <mattm...@apache.org>"
    gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
    gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
    owner.
    Primary key fingerprint: F434 C970 B95A 6FCA 6FB9  0C45 4EAA F8B6 0C1E 654B
    
    
    --k
    
    
    Chris Mattmann wrote:
    > Hey Sean I think I have a new key on my Mac – can you check? I just 
submitted the new
    > key to MIT keyserver, can you re-verify and see if that fixes it?
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Chris
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > On 7/23/17, 5:06 PM, "Sean Kelly"<ke...@apache.org>  wrote:
    >
    >      Hi folks:
    >
    >      I realize it's already 72 hours and we have the requisite 3 +1 votes,
    >      but I'm definitely in the -1 camp if this release was signed with the
    >      wrong key.
    >
    >      I hope it's just user error on my end.
    >
    >      Take care
    >      --k
    >
    >      >  *From:* Sean Kelly<ke...@apache.org>
    >      >  *Date:* 2017-07-22 at 12.54 p
    >      >  *To:* dev@oodt.apache.org
    >      >  *Subject:* [VOTE] Apache OODT 1.1 Release Candidate #2
    >      >  Did anyone check the signature?
    >      >
    >      >  I'm getting an unknown RSA key 0C1E654B:
    >      >
    >      >  fatalii 278 % date -u
    >      >  Sat Jul 22 17:53:42 UTC 2017
    >      >  fatalii 279 % gpg --verify apache-oodt-1.1-src.zip.asc
    >      >  gpg: Signature made Wed Jul 19 13:57:50 2017 CDT using RSA key ID 
0C1E654B
    >      >  gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
    >      >
    >      >  --k
    >      >
    >      >  *From:* Chris Mattmann<mattm...@apache.org>
    >      >  *Date:* 2017-07-19 at 2.01 p
    >      >  *To:* dev@oodt.apache.org
    >      >  *Subject:* [VOTE] Apache OODT 1.1 Release Candidate #2
    >      >  Hi Folks,
    >      >
    >      >  I have posted a 2nd release candidate for the Apache OODT 1.1 
release. The
    >      >  source code is at:
    >      >
    >      >  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/oodt/
    >      >
    >      >  For more detailed information, see the included CHANGES.txt file 
for details on
    >      >  release contents and latest changes. The release was made using 
the OODT
    >      >  release process, documented on the Wiki here:
    >      >
    >      >  https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OODT/Release+Process
    >      >
    >      >  The release was made from the OODT 1.1 tag at:
    >      >
    >      >  https://github.com/apache/oodt/tree/1.1/
    >      >
    >      >  A staged Maven repository is available at:
    >      >
    >      >  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheoodt-1013/
    >      >
    >      >  Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache OODT 1.1. The 
vote is
    >      >  open for at least the next 72 hours.
    >      >
    >      >  Only votes from OODT PMC are binding, but folks are welcome to 
check the
    >      >  release candidate and voice their approval or disapproval. The 
vote passes
    >      >  if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
    >      >
    >      >  [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OODT 1.1
    >      >
    >      >  [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
    >      >
    >      >  Thanks!
    >      >
    >      >  Chris Mattmann
    >      >
    >      >  P.S. Here is my +1.
    >      >
    >      >
    >      >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    


Reply via email to