1 |
Or may be something like this according to old disscussion |
2 |
|
3 |
http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/GPG-signing-for-git-commit-td2582986.html |
4 |
|
5 |
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 18:19:31 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
6 |
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 19:22:06 +0400 |
7 |
> Alexey Shvetsov <alexxy@g.o> wrote: |
8 |
> |
9 |
>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 07:57:24 -0700, Zac Medico wrote: |
10 |
>> > On 08/23/2011 07:02 AM, Alexey Shvetsov wrote: |
11 |
>> >> Ok. What is problems with thin Manifests (some kind of this |
12 |
>> already |
13 |
>> >> implented in funtoo) |
14 |
>> > |
15 |
>> > This is really easy to do. Like the manifest1 -> manifest2 |
16 |
>> > migration, we'll need some kind of repository marker which |
17 |
>> > indicates the manifest |
18 |
>> > format. For example, we could use an entry in metadata/layout.conf |
19 |
>> > for |
20 |
>> > this purpose (as I've already suggested in bug #333691). |
21 |
>> > |
22 |
>> >> and commit signing (this means gpg signing or something else?). |
23 |
>> > |
24 |
>> > I guess the existing manifest signing technique is likely to |
25 |
>> trigger |
26 |
>> > merge conflicts in the manifests. I suppose we could use another |
27 |
>> > marker, |
28 |
>> > similar to the thin manifest marker, to indicate that the existing |
29 |
>> > manifest signing technique should not be used in the git tree. |
30 |
>> |
31 |
>> Yep signing git commits with gpg should avoid conflicts. May we can |
32 |
>> use something like this [1] |
33 |
>> [1] |
34 |
>> |
35 |
>> http://weierophinney.net/matthew/archives/236-GPG-signing-Git-Commits.html |
36 |
> |
37 |
> Er, no. Signing commits != signing commit message text. |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Best Regards, |
41 |
Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov |
42 |
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Russia |
43 |
Department of Molecular and Radiation Biophysics |
44 |
Gentoo Team Ru |
45 |
Gentoo Linux Dev |
46 |
mailto:alexxyum@×××××.com |
47 |
mailto:alexxy@g.o |
48 |
mailto:alexxy@×××××××××××××.ru |