On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:04:32 +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote: > On Sat Jun 20 09:28, David Paleino wrote: > > Now that I read Ben's mail again, I see that his concern is also about the > > Maintainer field. I suppose that should be a real name too then? Or is it ok > > having a pseudonym because it's the sponsor taking responsibility for > > the upload? (given that using this pseudonym he won't ever become a DD/DM) > > Sponsors take responsibility for the upload, so this should be fine. Ok. > Also, going back to the note about reputation; There's no reason > reputation can't be associated with a pseudonym or with a GPG key > attached to a pseudonym. How do you sign such a key? You'd break the web of trust, if you don't check at least one government-issued document having a photo. And I can't make people associate my GPG key uid "hanska" with my document saying "David Paleino" -- even if they know that *I* am hanska (IRC, website, [..]). And having a key not signed by anyone seems rather useless :) (/me remembers his problems getting a GPG signature...) > Anyway, I have no idea whether my sponsorees who I have never met and haven't > gone through ID check are using their real names. If I don't care about that, > why should I care about someone who is using a pseudonym that doesn't look > like a real name. That's the point, "haven't gone through ID check". He could well maintain his package in Debian, just because he's not responsible for the upload. David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature