Re: [PATCH v2] gpg-interface: use more status letters

[Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>]

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 28.09.2016 21:59:
> Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
> 
>> - Use GNUPGHOME="$HOME/gnupg-home-not-used" just like in other tests (lib).
> 
> If you are not using /dev/null, I expected you to do
> 
> 	. ./test-lib.sh
> 	GNUPGHOME_saved=$GNPGHOME
>         . "$TEST_DIRECTORY/lib-gpg.sh"
> 
> and then use
> 
> 	GNUPGHOME="$GNUPGHOME_saved" git log -1 ...
> 
> in the test.
> 
> Otherwise, you are not futureproofing your use and only adding to
> maintenance burden.  The gnupg-home-not-used hack may turn out to be
> a problematic and test-lib.sh may update to point to somewhere else,
> which will leave your copy still pointing at the old problematic
> place).

Well, I understood you told me to do what test-lib.sh does.

You obviously wanted me to piggy-bak on test-lib.sh's behavior instead.

I don't know what's more likely to break - the latter relies on
test-lib.sh's setting GNUPGHOME to a non existing gpg home, which is
something funny to do if you don't even plan to use gpg.

>> - Do not parse for signer UID in the ERRSIG case (and test that we do not).
> 
> Good.
> 
>> - Retreat "rather" addition from the doc: good/valid are terms that we use
>>   differently from gpg anyways.
> 
> OK.
> 
>> +  "X" for a good expired signature, or good signature made by an expired key,
> 
> As an attempt to clarify that we cover both EXPSIG and EXPKEYSIG
> cases, I think this is good enough.  I may have phrased the former
> slightly differently, though: "a good signature that has expired".
> 
> I have no strong opinion if we want to stress that we cover both
> cases, though, which is I think what Ramsay's comment was about.

I'll comment in the reply to his 2nd e-mail....

Michael