On 2 June 2012 03:12, Andreas K. Huettel <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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
b) every commit must be signed
At very best, I think either
a) a future git might support signed rebases ( ie: replacing existing
signatures with new signatures in the name of the person performing
the rebase )
b) somebody could write a wrapper that provides signed-rebase support
until git get around to implementing it natively.
and even then, you're going to lose original signing info ( Though,
thats no worse than the signer of the manifest file changing every
perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3,
3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );"