Re: [git patches] libata updates, GPG signed (but see admin notes)

From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Date: Nov 1, 2011, 22:39 UTC
Message-ID: <20111101223917.GG32161@thunk.org>
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFx_rAA6TJkZn1Zvu6u9UjxnmTVt0HpMnvaE_q9Sx-jzPg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:21:59PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> So I'm wondering if we want to save it at all. it's quite possible
> that realistically speaking "google the mailing list archives" is the
> *right* way to look up the signature if it is ever needed later.

Given the number of trees that you merge in every merge window (never mind over an entire release), I don't think "google the mailing list archives" is going to scale. Finding some way to keep it along with the merge window seems the right thing. I agree that it should hidden normally, but that's a UI display issue. Heck, we could just hide after the terminating NULL in the commit description, per a discussion on the git list 2-3 weeks ago. :-)

Show 6 quoted lines

> Because in many ways, "git request-pull" is when you do want to sign
> stuff. A developer might well want to push out his stuff for some
> random internal testing (linux-next, for example), and then only later
> decide "Ok, it was all good, now I want to make it 'official' and ask
> Linus to pull it", and sign it at *that* time, rather than when
> actually pushing it out.

Sure, the signed content should be buried in the commit that it describes. Whether we carry it in an emphemeral tag or in the git request-pull is not really important from a security perspective. The tag is nicer simply because the person doing the pull won't need to cut and paste the signature information.

One approach which might work is if git request-pull sends the e-mail message with the git shortlog and diffstat, *and* an MIME attachment that contained all of the necessary information. The maintainer would then save the attachment, and feed it to git, which will display the git shortlog and diffstat, ask for confirmation, and then embed the digital signature into the merge commit.

The only problem with that is (a) you'd have to get over your hatred of attachment (but if you're using Gmail hopefully that's relative convenient :-), and (b) LKML list filter would have to be taught to tolerate git-generated attachments.

						- Ted