Messages in this thread |  | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | | Date | Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:38:54 -0700 | | Subject | Re: [git patches] libata updates, GPG signed (but see admin notes) |
| |
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:33 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > > Didn't realize that... I guess I'm too used to named remotes. > > If so, just using a tag should be fine, no?
Yes, that's what I think. But the argument for using a separate namespace is that (a) you never get confused (b) it would make it easier to make the 1:1 relationship between branch names and these "pull request signature tags" without limiting the naming of *normal* tags in any way (c) they do have separate lifetimes from "real" tags.
But seriously, I don't care about the *implementation* all that much. If people want to use the crazy git "notes" capability, you can do that too, although quite frankly, I don't see the point. What actually matters is that "git push" and "git pull" would JustWork(tm), and check the signature if one exists, without having to cut-and-paste data that simply shouldn't be visible to the user.
I abhor the interface Ingo suggested, for example. Why would we have stupid command line options that we should cut-and-paste? Automation is for computers, not for people.
Linus
|  |