1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mark@monetize.io>) id 1WnD9n-0003vT-8C
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 21 May 2014 20:30:35 +0000
Received: from mail-pa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.220.46])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WnD9m-0005UI-52
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 21 May 2014 20:30:35 +0000
Received: by mail-pa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id kq14so1744497pab.33
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 21 May 2014 13:30:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent
:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=2wwEGal3mLtZkrcrO/BhdEepc0d3cI8kIXmWVMV6VLE=;
b=WjaJGIVe25eEBb8fptOnRq/z0vRjSJ/Je4ueosvB1qtEIicOCjqTCp1bpYLe1CyavY
GcNnjm0fx3L5HhHPWHyI93kUEIiqs+V6NwJiOctxdZU7/h+yfMrKgr0RikMx6Pdv0BDb
Yhg4zDSJN82Kx4GJmVv5LLHJVho/vxKet2WV3/9i4kSolmd/CztI2vU5nCkdacXdjbl6
yh210mVgC8xVVjVv8Af3zZnbfVrhN4RCR3Ny+mg7nu7tUSWG1wn3lEIX+YTCfmiUYEoS
MCpgecnAHIluwZEexIoNmXrLc+xILxg3oJepOyWkzKufSGKwbLJxDPX6H+OkjTox3kGr
rlwQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQncJz3F22T89sDMR9ol8OSL1LL/Nj4ev/aUk8GPScNM2Ye+LtawuCdWoJ+wiFeMjyCQW/Ua
X-Received: by 10.66.142.201 with SMTP id ry9mr61246096pab.14.1400704228235;
Wed, 21 May 2014 13:30:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.127.195] (50-0-36-109.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net.
[50.0.36.109])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id x5sm9521535pbw.26.2014.05.21.13.30.26
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Wed, 21 May 2014 13:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <537D0CE1.3000608@monetize.io>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 13:30:25 -0700
From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize.io>
Organization: Monetize.io Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <CA+s+GJBNWh0Py9KB4Y+B19ACeHOygtkLrPw5SbZ0SrVs50pqvg@mail.gmail.com> <7B48B9D4-5FB0-42CA-A462-C20D3F345A9A@beams.io>
<CA+s+GJC8=OHmmF7fc-fT8fQDWE1uNcCS8-ELEKr0MjQ4CpbPBA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJC8=OHmmF7fc-fT8fQDWE1uNcCS8-ELEKr0MjQ4CpbPBA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
X-Headers-End: 1WnD9m-0005UI-52
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] PSA: Please sign your git commits
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 20:30:35 -0000
On 05/21/2014 10:10 AM, Wladimir wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Chris Beams <chris@beams.io> wrote:
>> I'm personally happy to comply with this for any future commits, but wonder
>> if you've considered the arguments against commit signing [1]? Note
>> especially the reference therein to Linus' original negative opinion on
>> signed commits [2].
>
> Yes, I've read it. But would his alternative, signing tags, really
> help us more here?
Honest question: what would signed commits do to help us here anyway?
What's the problem being solved?
Unfortunately git places signatures in the history itself, so it's not
like we could use easily use signatures to indicate acceptance after
code review, like we could if we were using monotone for example. Git
just wasn't designed for a commit-signing workflow.
|
