On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 19:47 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote: > 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. > from what I've read there's no cryptographic signature of any type with openid. We might want to make sure that's valid for legal purposes. -sv _______________________________________________ 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
