On 2022-07-01 10:14 AM, Simon Ser wrote:
> FWIW putting an Ed25519 key in id_rsa works just fine on builds.sr.ht for me.

Now I'm wondering if there is something wrong with my private key. It 
will allow me to login to services just fine from my computer, but if I 
login to the builds session and add the private key to a file myself, it 
still doesn't work.

Will recheck with a key generated with a different method.

On Mon Jul 20, 2020 at 5:37 PM EDT, Drew DeVault wrote:
> No, the build system cannot be used for this purpose.

I thought that it would be possible to build a site and then deploy
using Sourcehut. Assuming whatever service it is hosted on has a
command line based deployment method.

Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding the question.

-Zach

On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Wolf480pl wrote:
> IANAL, but if you grant a permission (a license) to someone
> who doesn't need your permission, does it really hurt?

You can't grant a license for something you don't have
rights to. You would need to transform it in some way to
gain copyright, which you could then put under any license
you want. See this article by CC. [1]

-Zach

1: https://creativecommons.org/2019/11/20/reproductions-of-public-domain-works/

On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 9:14 AM, Drew DeVault wrote:
> We can probably make an exception for works which are not copyrightable
> in the US. I've also been thinking about adding an exception for the US
> Public Domain, so that works of the US government could be hosted here.

That might be interesting. Could be used to host the legal code and track
bills passed as commits... though that would probably be a ton of work.

I know there was a project like that for the US Constitution on Github, but
that doesn't change nearly as fast.

-Zach

On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 4:15 AM, Jean-Christophe Helary wrote:
> I personally think that what Drew is doing is actually increasing user freedom.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree on this point.

You can't restrict what a user can do on a platform and say it is increasing
their freedom. That doesn't mean that it is wrong or shouldn't be done,
but you can't do one thing and call it another.

-Zach

On Fri May 22, 2020 at 7:11 AM EDT, Thomas Bracht Laumann Jespersen wrote:
> I got the topic wrong I think, it should be [PATCH man.sr.ht] shouldn't
> it?

"[PATCH sr.ht-docs]" iirc.

On Wed, May 20, 2020, at 5:44 PM, Drew DeVault wrote:
> If harsh language scares cryptocurrency enthusiasts off of the platform,
> then the platform will be better for it. 

I don't disagree with the sentiment directed at the crypto people.
But my two cents would be that if such language was regularly
showing up on issue trackers I was subscribed to, or mailing lists
I was part of, I would rather find other projects to contribute to
than continue to run into it.

-Zach

On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 7:55 PM, Gísli Karl Gíslason wrote:
> I think it's vital to support U2F two factor as it's the most secure
> form of 2 factor authentication by far.

Personally, I would say that supporting Webauthn, is far more
important since it is an actual standard.

Adding an additional possible location for the fcgiwrap socket file.

---
 git.sr.ht/installation.md | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/git.sr.ht/installation.md b/git.sr.ht/installation.md
index 2631f9d..79ad9db 100644
--- a/git.sr.ht/installation.md
+++ b/git.sr.ht/installation.md
@@ -87,4 +87,5 @@ of private repositories.
 
 If you don't have `/run/fcgiwrap.sock` on your system, you'll need to install
 the `fcgiwrap` package (for instance: `apt-get install fcgiwrap`). On some
[message trimmed]

---
 zchrykng | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
 create mode 100644 zchrykng

diff --git a/zchrykng b/zchrykng
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..66cb3d4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/zchrykng
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+I have successfully used git send-email!
-- 
2.17.1
[message trimmed]