X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.6 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <00ab01cd48aa$31047bb0$930d7310$@motionview3d.com>
References: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAH3PqnIBVHtCiVMVjN0ExZLigAAAEAAAAJXIkaLIcH5Pn+g+gRSa2KoBAAAAAA==@expertise.cl>	<20120608184641 DOT GA13771 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>	<4FD32DC5 DOT 10703 AT gmail DOT com>	<20120609155700 DOT GA21988 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>	<4FD73CC9 DOT 3070501 AT etr-usa DOT com>	<20120612131608 DOT GA18920 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>	<00ab01cd48aa$31047bb0$930d7310$@motionview3d.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:50:42 +0100
Message-ID: <CADSoG1uBiAnhwZ=mm+1FjZzDK82rt4-k15fpEAxuR6NpCsNaeA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Trusted Software Vendor
From: Nick Lowe <nick DOT lowe AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

To me, the key question is:

Would Red Hat have an objection in principle to signing Cygwin and its
packages given the history and ties.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple