Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:37:25
Message-Id: 1636308.cYuZxjJslQ@grenadine
In Reply to: Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver by Kent Fredric
> On 2 June 2012 03:12, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: > >> "git cat-file -p $sha" is as close as you can get to commit objects > >> without needing to write your own decompressing wrapper. But it gives > >> the same results. > > > > Now, does the "signed data" also contain the parent sha? > > > > If yes, our discussion about rebasing is moot, because a rebase will in > > every case destroy previous signatures. > > Yes. Which basically means, you *cannot* have both > > a) rebase only merges > and > b) every commit must be signed > > as policies. >
I would say that this is a very strong argument in favour of allowing merge commits. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer kde, sci, arm, tex, printing

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies