1 |
Am Sonntag 03 Juni 2012, 10:18:24 schrieb Robin H. Johnson: |
2 |
> I propose: |
3 |
> - merges are explicitly allowed, even non-fast-forwards |
4 |
> - all commits MUST be signed |
5 |
> - if you include a commit from a user: |
6 |
> author := non-@gentoo |
7 |
> committer := @gentoo |
8 |
> signer := $committer |
9 |
> |
10 |
|
11 |
Sounds reasonable given the current state of git. Let's just be clear about |
12 |
the following consequence (I hope I understand this correctly): |
13 |
|
14 |
* User makes signed improvements in gentoo-x86 clone |
15 |
* Developer pulls from user and >merges< |
16 |
* Developer's history contains commits by user, which cannot be pushed to |
17 |
gentoo-x86 |
18 |
|
19 |
Which means in the end "all merges are explicitly allowed, as long as they |
20 |
only contain developer commits; commits pulled from users must be rebased". |
21 |
|
22 |
This is something that (IMHO) we could certainly live with; the only thing I |
23 |
am worried about is, how do we automatize it so a developer who is not end-of- |
24 |
the-line git guru and ends up with some user-signed commits in his history can |
25 |
clean up his local tree again. |
26 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
|
30 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
31 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
32 |
dilfridge@g.o |
33 |
http://www.akhuettel.de/ |