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 view. 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/