| 1 |
> On 2 June 2012 03:12, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> >> "git cat-file -p $sha" is as close as you can get to commit objects |
| 3 |
> >> without needing to write your own decompressing wrapper. But it gives |
| 4 |
> >> the same results. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Now, does the "signed data" also contain the parent sha? |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > If yes, our discussion about rebasing is moot, because a rebase will in |
| 9 |
> > every case destroy previous signatures. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Yes. Which basically means, you *cannot* have both |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> a) rebase only merges |
| 14 |
> and |
| 15 |
> b) every commit must be signed |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> as policies. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I would say that this is a very strong argument in favour of allowing merge |
| 21 |
commits. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
| 25 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
| 26 |
kde, sci, arm, tex, printing |
Archives