On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 04:04:39PM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 03:35:59PM +0200, Mathieu Mirmont wrote:
> > Hey, thanks for looking into my application. I wasn't too sure what to
> > apply for TBH, I wasn't sure is DM was a typical step before DD or the
> > statement of a different intention. One of my sponsors suggested that
> > I apply for DD.
> >
> > My prime motivation to apply for DD/DM is to not have to bother people
> > to upload new versions of the packages that I maintain. DM would be
> > totally fine.
>
> Well, if you have DDs that would advocate your DDs, we can totally do
> this, but indeed from your words it sounds a weak motivation, and I'd
> recommend to re-apply as DM. However it would be great to hear from
> your potential advocates first :) - please point them to this thread.
My intention is to apply for DD eventually, and if the regular process
is indeed to apply for DM first then I don't see any reason why I
should be skipping the line. I'll re-apply for DM.
> > > Furthermore, I notice that your GPG key has no signatures: remember that
> > > you'll need 2 for DD, but only one for DM (signatures or endorsements).
> >
> > Yes I will ask my sponsors if they would consider signing my key. It
> > is a bit difficult with the ongoing pandemic to meet and sign keys in
> > person. I have been signing all my emails and my packages with this
> > key so there is some history recorded within Debian, I am hoping that
> > this can be a sufficient proof for the time being. Do you maybe have
> > suggestions?
>
> I haven't looked at your key, but if it's old enough, and you used it
> enough to establish some kind of consistency, that should be enough for
> somebody you interacted with to endorse the key.
I interacted with Mathieu *online*, but there is no way I can guarantee his identity,
without either me or someone in the web of trust met him in person.
Jérémy