> > The file at [1] is required as there are automated scripts that > regularly scan the distribution area to verify that all the > distributed files are correctly signed.
hmmm ok, > The copy at [2] could probably > go, Amita never did end up doing a release so her key isn't really > needed. I don't have a problem with leaving Amita's key there it just feels awkward having the file in two places. Having said getting rid of the change tracked version also doesn't seem ideal. Maybe I could create a little synch script that runs now and again to keep the two in step like we do with the web site Anyone think that sounds problematic? > > ...ant > Simon -- Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
