From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E821320133 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 00:00:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753750AbdCGAAW (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2017 19:00:22 -0500 Received: from mail-lf0-f48.google.com ([209.85.215.48]:33762 "EHLO mail-lf0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752712AbdCGAAT (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2017 19:00:19 -0500 Received: by mail-lf0-f48.google.com with SMTP id a6so79829000lfa.0 for ; Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:59:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=62Z7agQe/ZgwfFXzWXrgZmLYjUp0CTOqYX7HWrvmVXQ=; b=nUvfeg084HyNiI0Gcy8gHFIZGFJC+qHaX1yHNZwiB/bcEZyd0YPrWSTbCP7l17EXq3 zg2L/Vcf5jD+rqK8ZUHjybClNyMhfYjwOHhgNASvy+QgECdbo8S7XeSTx+uP69i9JMb5 Y9+4Rj33vvut3seWDkxGye9WxXDaH55beyG6CF9TxE7ZsQslCgT0aL0OqssxNRsfIgI7 F/fgEV8w3Bq7pF3c6d0e33Q97sBdHR7degspXWiJl1DNkCt06abCo6NW8KyCotVGNJxS MJ0Rsj2+iUlmvOUYiq4/BlLArAj8pcgjzDxHiQwE1MouzIZM1ebcsSMrocibMqrcnz5w qqqQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=62Z7agQe/ZgwfFXzWXrgZmLYjUp0CTOqYX7HWrvmVXQ=; b=oeJVNPTp9WWH+2BkeQnO/jb+tZb1/Vv+fHc78ixnoRnQVEwNzM0fQhoDu5881GQuiI 6QwM6dTlJRcLoUBUmiUV7bbMmag7Q8uQGR61JpWGGMIvu6EG48I33BNnoGsV/c3J8Xgg MEyNdXDhdExuEA18g2iSVwpSmlC7xCWm8YCROg+ks4saVakWVtcoC9YuNsLpCOLEqOuI a9sQUkI+B8uDH/nCOtk4feZ6ISNnQ48mC6WrNED6cGUdNQS4Th95Gy1sG7dUL69I/91z 19t5nAi0lYYteRs+DTNxSZvkqu51ikAMEy1BIFyD71fJpFK1dqFLd3a2MFmwUZBoAKmV 7TOw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39msJ+e1vyIiGX2x8E7NBJETCAib+E6+Y8Aw9OU4r2QWYf2c00tdyP/KCuZi/TWf7Q== X-Received: by 10.46.1.209 with SMTP id f78mr4961110lji.121.1488844770704; Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:59:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.26] (afb78.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl. [83.25.131.78]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id h140sm4368405lfg.39.2017.03.06.15.59.28 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:59:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [Request for Documentation] Differentiate signed (commits/tags/pushes) To: Junio C Hamano , Stefan Beller References: Cc: tom@oxix.org, Matthieu Moy , "git@vger.kernel.org" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jakub_Nar=c4=99bski?= Message-ID: <47ad8b6d-0a65-2f8c-dcc5-49a8a8d5ab2a@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 00:59:10 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org W dniu 06.03.2017 o 23:13, Junio C Hamano pisze: > Stefan Beller writes: > >> What is the difference between signed commits and tags? >> (Not from a technical perspective, but for the end user) [...] >> Off list I was told gpg-signed commits are a "checkbox feature", >> i.e. no real world workflow would actually use it. (That's a bold >> statement, someone has to use it as there was enough interest >> to implement it, no?) > > I'd agree with that "checkbox" description, except that you need to > remember that a project can enforce _any_ workflow to its developer, > even if it does not make much sense, and at that point, the workflow > would become a real-world workflow. The word "real world workflow" > does not make any assurance if that workflow is sensible. > > Historically, "tag -s" came a lot earlier. When a project for > whatever reason wants signature for each and every commit so that > they somehow can feel good, without "commit -s", it would have made > us unnecessary work to scale tag namespace only because there will > be tons of pointless tags. "commit -s" was a remedy for that. Also from what I remember signed commits came before mergetags, that is the result of merging a signed tag (storing the signature of one of parents of the merge commit to not pollute tag namespace). And this workflow, from what I know, is quite useful. -- Jakub Narębski