Request: independently verifiable source signing and reproducible-build details for v7.0.0

Hello maintainers,

I am reviewing python-tuf v7.0.0 for use in a security-sensitive, offline-verification workflow.

I could verify the following GitHub objects:

• Annotated tag object: fed65f73486314242cc738fc7c5c891f5d7fc369
• Peeled commit: 353bdb767db56fd4667c9bcf56b710d50fdc2ac0

GitHub shows the tag as verified through GitHub's web-flow signing key. However, I have not found an independently published maintainer signature or key binding that can authenticate these source objects without initially trusting GitHub as the identity authority.

Could you please clarify:

1. Is there an official non-GitHub location that binds the v7.0.0 tag or commit to a maintainer-controlled signing-key fingerprint?
2. Is a detached signature or signed release statement available for the tag, commit, or source archive?
3. What is the canonical SHA-256 digest of the source archive used to build the published v7.0.0 artifacts?
4. What exact build-tool and dependency versions were used for the release?
5. Are the wheel and source distribution intended to be byte-for-byte reproducible from the tagged source? If not, which content-level comparison is considered authoritative?
6. Are there plans to publish provenance or attestations that bind the source commit to the PyPI artifacts?

This is a supply-chain provenance question, not a vulnerability report. No private repository information or credentials are involved.

Thank you.

Empieza revisando el annotated tag v7.0.0, el peeled commit, el source archive, la wheel y la source distribution indicados en la issue. Comprueba el proceso de release y packaging del proyecto en busca de firmas de maintainers, vinculaciones de claves, hashes, versiones de las herramientas de build y de las dependencias, y registros de provenance. Se considera terminado cuando se hayan documentado o publicado respuestas autorizadas a las seis preguntas solicitadas sobre provenance y reproducibilidad.