On Mon, 1 Nov 2004, Peter Jones wrote: <lot of text trimed to be digested later - mostly looks like RHEL-QA vs Fedora-QA vs Rawhide-QA > > > For us users there is no confusion: > > - 'rawhide-key' is different from 'redhat-key' - so there is no confusion here. > > Make this work in a world where users draw from multiple, unrelated > repositories. Some people (not very many) know that rawhide-key means > it isn't for a production release. But Joe Foo's repositories have > packages signed with joefookey1 and joefookey2. Which is which? > > This is not viable. This is not the problem under discussion. 'Current' rawhide' doesn't fix it. gpg-signed rawhide won't fix it. > > > - 'gpg' singed packages doesn't => stability (aka rawhide can always > > eat data) - so no confusion here.. > > The signature *sometimes* does imply that. If the only difference is > the key, then there's really not any way to tell when. If you think 'gpg-signing' rawhide packages changes the meaning of 'rawhide' - and adds in stability 'conotation' - I don't know what to say. I've reached the end of my logical reasoning. Will stop now. Satish