On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 01:34:58PM -0700, Carlos Y. Villalpando wrote:
> Well, Quozl is taking care of the source revision control, but I don't
> think the keys should be under revision control.

It is really up to the person wearing KEYGOD hat.

If I were wearing it, which I don't plan to do, I would be using
revision control to supplement my record-keeping, and provide a public
simplified view of the policy decisions.  I'm not suggesting you do,
Carlos, I'm merely saying that's what I'd do.

I use darcs for continuum etc/ tree, and for meta 1 configuration tree,
but I don't see any good reason for making them available for public

If the original poster is trying to say they'd like more visibility into
the decision-making process of KEYGOD, I wish they'd come out and say
that rather than suggest a specific implementation.  I'm happy with the
visibility.  The key list is entirely visible.

James Cameron    mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org     http://quozl.netrek.org/