[DC LoCo] Fwd: Re: NM Application Rejected

[Andres Mejia]

Hi Luke,

Recall how you refused to sign my old key? Well, it was suggested that I ask 
you again to sign my old key. Please read the forwarded message and also the 
response I received about updating my key at [1].

As per the suggestion, would you be willing to make an exception just this 
once and sign my old key?

Also, for any of the Ubuntu people that already signed my new key, can you 
also sign my old key?

It's this key.
pub   1024D/E5F13196 2007-05-08
      Key fingerprint = 3278 70A0 1696 E190 3AEF  0DD1 82C1 5B02 E5F1 3196
uid                  Andres Mejia <mcitadel at gmail.com>
uid                  Andres Mejia <amejia2 at gmu.edu>
uid                  Andres Mejia <andres.mejia1 at gmail.com>
uid                  Andres Mejia <ceros at xbmc.org>
sub   1024g/37EB1706 2007-05-08

You should be able to verify that this message comes from me by checking the 
signature of this message (I mean the entire message, not just the forwarded 
message).

----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: Re: NM Application Rejected
Date: Wednesday 11 May 2011, 7:55:29 pm
From: Enrico Zini <enrico at debian.org>
To: Andres Mejia <mcitadel at gmail.com>
CC: debian-newmaint at lists.debian.org, Christoph Egger <christoph at debian.org>

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 07:41:00PM -0400, Andres Mejia wrote:

> Seeing that my application was rejected due to not having enough signatures, 
> would now be the best time to simply redo the ID check with the new key?

No, it wasn't rejected, but just set on hold until we work out the
situation with the keys, which hopefully won't take long. I'm very happy
with all the interaction with your AM and I certainly don't want you to
go through it again.

As I said, would it be possible for you to get some more signatures? If
that is not easy for you to do, please feel free to let me know with
some details and I can see if I can help.


> Also, if applicants are now required to have their key signed by more than 
one 
> developer, then the document found at [1] should be updated.
> 1. http://www.debian.org/devel/join/nm-checklist

Oh dear, indeed. Can you please ping me next week if you don't see it
getting fixed?


> Here are the fingerprints for both keys.
> 
> Old key
> pub   1024D/E5F13196 2007-05-08
>       Key fingerprint = 3278 70A0 1696 E190 3AEF  0DD1 82C1 5B02 E5F1 3196

This one is signed by:
sig!         06A7376E 2008-05-04  Patrick Ouellette <pat at flying-gecko.net>

> New key
> pub   4096R/53C854DF 2011-04-07
>       Key fingerprint = 2655 978E A053 D586 597F  E5D6 3FB9 C78A 53C8 54DF

And this one is signed by;
sig!         F9FDD506 2011-04-23  Luke Faraone <lfaraone at debian.org>


You could, for example, mail Luke asking him to also sign E5F13196,
signing the mail with both keys. Then do the same with Patrick, asking
him to also sign 53C854DF. You can write something similar to what
people write in "gpg key transition statements".

That should get you two signatures on both keys with very minimal
effort.


Ciao,

Enrico

-- 
GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico at enricozini.org>

-----------------------------------------
-- 
Regards,
Andres Mejia

1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2011/05/msg00020.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-us-dc/attachments/20110511/7e0ecfdf/attachment.pgp>