On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 18:23 +0530, Rahul wrote: > Its not the requirement of the CLA itself for the wiki that is a big > problem but the process. If it's just a click through method I suspect > we wouldnt have any complaints at all. The requirement we are meeting with the GPG signing is to provide a higher likelihood that the new account holder is actually who they say they are. No promises, but I bet a valid OpenID would suffice for the proof. The CLA could then be just a click-through. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
