Should Fedora rpms be signed?

[Jeff Spaleta]

On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 12:58:22 -0600 (CST), Satish Balay <balay at fastmail.fm> wrote:
> No confusion here either - as rawhide packages are never mistaken for
> erratum packages.

really? noone ever mistakes a package from rawhide as a consumable package?
really? no one ever does a random search for a package from an online
rpm warehouse and finds a package meant as a piece of rawhide and not
as a consumable update?
really? no one ever takes packages from the rawhide tree and mixes
them with updates and creates a homebrew repository that other users
will be using?

i think you need to spend more time in general purpose community
forums and watch how often the less informed are confused about what
rawhide/development packages are meant for.  Everyone in this
conversation is in the 1% tail of the distribution of clue in the
userbase.  Arguing that you are not confused is sort of pointless.  I
see people confused by what rawhide is, every single day.

-jef