<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/20/2016 11:00 PM, Burton, Ross
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJTo0LZ=0_jwrZ=1FXnBHpd_9K=1qfnGijrXe62qSaaNenzUmQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 20 September 2016 at 09:15, Hongxu
Jia <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:hongxu.jia@windriver.com" target="_blank">hongxu.jia@windriver.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div id=":oj" class="a3s aXjCH m15746aa47dadab15">-Upstream-Status:
Submitted [Sent email to <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rpm-devel@rpm5.org">rpm-devel@rpm5.org</a>]<br>
+Upstream-Status: Rejected [Sent email to <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rpm-devel@rpm5.org">rpm-devel@rpm5.org</a>]<br>
+<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://rpm5.org/community/rpm-devel/5655.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://rpm5.org/community/<wbr>rpm-devel/5655.html</a></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
Considering upstream has explicitly rejected this patch, why
should we accept it?</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
From his reply, he will remove "SUPPORT_NOSIGNATURES" code in
future:<br>
----------------<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
Note that all the code marked with "SUPPORT_NOSIGNATURES" is
targeted<br>
for removal. RPM5 has been producing MANDATORY signed packages for<br>
more than 5 years, so all packages produced by RPM5 SHOULD have<br>
both verifiable signatures/pubkeys included for many years now.<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<br>
Your alternative (of course) is to re-patch rpm to re-add
--nosignatures as<br>
you wish: I will be happy to send you the needed patch when I remove<br>
all the SUPPORT_NOSIGNATURES code.<br>
----------------<br>
<br>
If we need to support --nosignatures, we have to re-patch rpm
locally.<br>
We could drop it after upstream removes "SUPPORT_NOSIGNATURES"<br>
code.<br>
<br>
//Hongxu<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJTo0LZ=0_jwrZ=1FXnBHpd_9K=1qfnGijrXe62qSaaNenzUmQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Ross</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>