1 |
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 3:31 PM Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> |
2 |
wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 1/31/19 5:35 PM, Alec Warner wrote: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > My main problem with the GLEP is that it seems to propose a WoT for |
7 |
> > a WoT's sake and my question then becomes "why do we need a WoT?" |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > As in, what does a WoT enable the project to do that it cannot do |
10 |
> > now? |
11 |
> |
12 |
> There are multiple aspects to this, and I'm only commenting the way I |
13 |
> see it here. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> being part of the WoT allows external parties to find a trust path to |
16 |
> gentoo developers, e.g when it comes to relying on communication in |
17 |
> various channels. This part could also be solved by infra running a |
18 |
> Gentoo Developer CA that signs all developers' Transferable Public Key |
19 |
> (TSP, aka public key). |
20 |
> |
21 |
|
22 |
So we have a website that lists all of our developers and their gpg-fps |
23 |
already. I realize that mgorny will object that this is a 'nonstandard |
24 |
tool' or somesuch, but I think from my POV its a pretty straightforward |
25 |
tool. Obviously it requires trusting www.gentoo.org and our CA (of which we |
26 |
do not run our own, so it is letsencrypt, IIRC.) |
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
> |
30 |
> More generally, being part of the WoT can demonstrate participation in |
31 |
> various developer communities. A user that is involved in various |
32 |
> upstream projects and familiar with them already can potentially be more |
33 |
> valuable as a developer for Gentoo, and can also potentially be a factor |
34 |
> for reduced tension between developers as they have demonstrated being |
35 |
> part of other communities already. |
36 |
> |
37 |
|
38 |
I agree this is a benefit, but is not sufficient to be mandatory. |
39 |
|
40 |
|
41 |
> |
42 |
> In addition comes a better certainty about the UID used for copyright in |
43 |
> signed-off-by, we as a distribution rely on this for both developers and |
44 |
> external contributors, and we need to demonstrate that we have taken |
45 |
> reasonable measures to ensure that what we add is unencumbered. |
46 |
> |
47 |
|
48 |
I assume this is where the mandatory bits come in (and obviously where all |
49 |
of the exciting politicking will happen around who owns how to assess and |
50 |
address risk to "gentoo" and what "gentoo" is and so forth.) |
51 |
|
52 |
To that end, is the WoT also mandatory for contributors? I didn't see |
53 |
anything in the GLEP about it. |
54 |
|
55 |
-A |
56 |
|
57 |
|
58 |
> -- |
59 |
> Kristian Fiskerstrand |
60 |
> OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net |
61 |
> fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 |
62 |
> |
63 |
> |