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=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 74BA320989 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:58:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753255AbcJJR6f (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:58:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:59614 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753099AbcJJR6e (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:58:34 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C940443914; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:58:33 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=nWl9wmH7Z89RXXZzQZmQXWPcKLw=; b=L30mGe PQfpqrlEoo19SpbqGGhfC1+EAcgpGzvvkM5m+wjS+PPRwfa6B34w33ec/phXkdFJ kM/ca3aBotjVA5qFqyRZc66E5dium9cA0GCz43ygTomd5dp2Jzo8PHZ8YTDu2FtO zCkM75aMOaOQO5RR1owxVEPwzniNUjLEMIlpk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=JtLUskNDucNUP0SqpsgNRbrrFezUaa2f OZ/DtpNoVpLm85NfREhp7TVpsn6zpD2s4f6GP7yX/WPwUQDs6DTLJCGCTApQnqVc 8vv9rm5fo5CRLoagb55+ui0ZUb8OABxi1iBj4Lau6q048ym+yE81C0k04wKEsa+X QlwYq8Cn4VI= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0F6E43913; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:58:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3B95343910; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:58:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Michael J Gruber Cc: Ramsay Jones , git@vger.kernel.org, Alex Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpg-interface: use more status letters In-Reply-To: <8e496061-ce6c-450f-7c9e-785572d50b79@drmicha.warpmail.net> (Michael J. Gruber's message of "Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:59:49 +0200") References: <24ecc903-3e5a-47f6-f073-00a1c709d5e8@ramsayjones.plus.com> <85fa6296-17f0-0e8c-ec1b-54cd48c45223@drmicha.warpmail.net> <8e496061-ce6c-450f-7c9e-785572d50b79@drmicha.warpmail.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 10:58:31 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 28C60A0E-8F13-11E6-96A0-5F377B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Michael J Gruber writes: > Sorry, this got "lost in vacation". Before that, I was looking for an > easy way to test expired signatures, but gpg1 and gpg2 behave somewhat > differently in that respect (2 does not allow to create already expired > signatures). > > Is there anything I should or could do now? I dunno. It's your itch. You can say "I'll need more time to figure out the way to test what I am not testing here, so do not merge it to 'next' yet". You can also say "This is good enough for now, so go ahead and merge it to 'next'; more detailed tests can be done as follow-up patches if needed". You can also say "Thinking about it again, there is no strong reason why we need to differentiate EXPSIG and EXPKEYSIG, so don't do this SQUASH and use my original one as-is". I'd be happy with any of the above and there may be other ones I'd be happy with that I haven't thought of ;-)