Re: [Debconf-discuss] Alternative keysigning procedures
- To: debian developers <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>, debconf-discuss@lists.debconf.org
- Subject: Re: [Debconf-discuss] Alternative keysigning procedures
- From: Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 00:27:51 +0300
- Message-id: <[🔎] 1149456471.25714.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
- In-reply-to: <1148859628.12655.26.camel@ubu.mcmillan.net.nz>
- References: <87hd3egirh.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <871wuiimii.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <20060525133943.GD13985@khazad-dum.debian.net> <87slmyktps.fsf@gismo.pca.it> <871wuiimii.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <20060525133943.GD13985@khazad-dum.debian.net> <871wuiimii.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <20060525092124.GB17033@timotheus.schuldei.org> <871wuiimii.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <20060527214720.GA5143@lapse.madduck.net> <20060528115423.GE18247@mauritius.dodds.net> <1148859628.12655.26.camel@ubu.mcmillan.net.nz>
su, 2006-05-28 kello 18:40 -0500, Andrew McMillan kirjoitti:
> (a) Order the list of keysigning participants by centrality.
It might be interesting to compare the optimal grouping of people to a
random one, using the "matrix" style of keysigning party I proposed
after the Debconf5 one. See [1] for more info.
[1] http://liw.iki.fi/liw/log/2005-07.html#20050725d
If the optimal and random matrix groupings aren't too far apart, it
might make sense to use the low-effort random approach over the more
difficult optimal one.
--
Pink timeout
Reply to: