Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 04:58:38 +0200 From: beeessdee@ruggedinbox.com To: "Glen Barber" <gjb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: beeessdee@ruggedinbox.com, FreeBSD Release Engineering Team <re@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 10.1-BETA3 Now Available Message-ID: <d857447441d76080fc3f1b480e5d46fb.squirrel@s4bysmmsnraf7eut.onion> In-Reply-To: <20140929025102.GH75063@hub.FreeBSD.org> References: <20140928155118.GA75063@hub.FreeBSD.org> <fe17030e3efeefb5dfa800b46ee181d9.squirrel@s4bysmmsnraf7eut.onion> <20140929025102.GH75063@hub.FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, September 29, 2014 4:51 am, "Glen Barber" <gjb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 04:45:21AM +0200, beeessdee@ruggedinbox.com wrote: >> Why 10.1-BETA3 announcement signed with not usual PGP key? >> > > Because it is a BETA build, and not a release. > > Glen As my first mail said: BETA2 announce signed with keyid 0xAF8B5ED0 (subkey of primary 0xA0B946A3, Key fingerprint = 78B3 42BA 26C7 B2AC 681E A7BE 524F 0C37 A0B9 46A3). So as BETA1, and many other prerelease announce by you IIRC... So, why BETA2 and BETA3 different keys? Is there official policy? Thanks for reply.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d857447441d76080fc3f1b480e5d46fb.squirrel>