https://www.hackdiary.com/2004/01/18/revoking-a-gpg-key/
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 9:15 AM Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks Sean, appreciate it. Do you know the magic command to do that > revocation? ( > > > > On 12/20/17, 9:14 AM, "Sean Kelly" <ke...@apache.org> wrote: > > Chris: > > This time I get: > > gpg: Good signature from "Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org>" > > So I am now +1 to release! > > Thanks Chris! > --k > > PS: You might want to revoke your two older keys and make FD01FEDB the > go-to. > > > Chris Mattmann wrote: > > Can you try now – I updated with the KEYS file from Master that has > my new KEY. For whatever > > reason it didn’t make it into the tag, which I think is fine, since > master always has the latest > > and greatest. > > > > > > > > On 12/20/17, 8:58 AM, "Sean Kelly"<ke...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Thanks Chris! > > > > I imported the KEYS but I still get > > > > gpg: Can't check signature: No public key > > > > Is it possible you signed this with a newly generated key > that's not in > > the KEYS file? > > > > --k > > > > Chris Mattmann wrote: > > > KEYS file added! ( do I have your +1? ( > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/20/17, 8:38 AM, "Sean Kelly"<ke...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > Strangely this (and the release announcement) ended up > in my spam folder. > > > > > > Here goes: > > > > > > MD5: ✓ > > > SHA1: ✓ > > > Python tests: ✓ > > > Java tests: ✓ > > > Signature: gpg: Can't check signature: No public key > > > > > > Don't we also put a convenience copy of the KEYS file > in the release dir? > > > > > > Take care > > > --k > > > > Chris Mattmann<mailto:mattm...@apache.org> > > > > 2017-12-19 at 8.50 p > > > > Ping ( > > > > > > > > Can I get 2 more VOTEs here so I can push this > release out? It’s kind > > > > of needed for DRAT. > > > > We can release a 1.2.2 with Tom’s patch later, but > would really love > > > > to release this. Thanks. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/12/17, 9:53 AM, "Chris Mattmann"< > mattm...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have posted a 1st release candidate for the > Apache OODT 1.2.1 > > > > 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 1.2 tag at: > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/oodt/tree/1.2.1/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A staged Maven repository is available at: > > > > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheoodt-1015/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache > OODT 1.2.1. 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 1.2.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Here is my +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
