Message-ID: <537F796A.2040009@monetize.io>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 09:38:02 -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>	<537D0CE1.3000608@monetize.io>	<CAAS2fgSN00Y2XUqLoft9=Fq1GfWvSYQfXdD=RE8890iOU5asRQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAJHLa0NNMKW57r2cRsu3a1UFSf5MSp-EWATqf--DKTe-=n26CA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+s+GJBJKQqsJHzdHvw0-r3mmvbRMDpUrWFj2O2-RXkpgGLO7g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJBJKQqsJHzdHvw0-r3mmvbRMDpUrWFj2O2-RXkpgGLO7g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] PSA: Please sign your git commits
Precedence: list

I know the likelihood of this happening is slim, but if these are the
desired features we should consider switching to monotone (monotone.ca)
which has a much more flexible DAG structure and workflow built around
programmable multi-sig signing of commits. We could still maintain the
github account as a two-way repository interface, but acceptance of a
pull request would require some threshold signature sign-off in monotone.

I would seriously suggest anybody on this list exploring monotone if you
haven't already, at least for your personal projects if it is too late
to make that choice for bitcoin. Besides the benefits of using it, we
should be supporting build infrastructure that enables less trusted,
less centralized development.

http://www.monotone.ca/

Mark

On 05/23/2014 12:12 AM, Wladimir wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
>> Related:  Current multi-sig wallet technology being rolled out now,
>> with 2FA and other fancy doodads, is now arguably more secure than my
>> PGP keyring.  My PGP keyring is, to draw an analogy, a non-multisig
>> wallet (set of keys), with all the associated theft/data
>> destruction/backup risks.
>>
>> The more improvements I see in bitcoin wallets, the more antiquated my
>> PGP keyring appears.  Zero concept of multisig.  The PGP keyring
>> compromise process is rarely exercised.  2FA is lacking.  At least
>> offline signing works well. Mostly.
> 
> Would be incredible to have multisig for git commits as well. I don't
> think git supports multiple signers for one commit at this point -
> amending the signature replaces the last one - but it would allow for
> some interesting multi-factor designs in which the damage when a dev's
> computer is compromised would be reduced.
> 
> Sounds like a lot of work to get a good workflow there, though.
> 
> My mail about single-signing commits was already longer than I
> expected when I started writing there. Even though the process is
> really simple.
> 
> Though if anyone's interest is piqued by this, please pick it up.
> 
> Wladimir
>