Re: [PATCH] Documentation: clarify signature verification

From: KellerFuchs <kellerfuchs@hashbang.sh>
Date: Apr 12, 2016, 01:00 UTC
Message-ID: <20160412010009.GD9034@hashbang.sh>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqtwj8rtcd.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 09:41:22AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> KellerFuchs <KellerFuchs@hashbang.sh> writes:
> > The reason for the first edit is that “trusted” and “valid” are OpenPGP
> >   concepts: a key is trusted if the user set a trust level for it,
> >   and a uid is valid if it has been signed by a trusted key [0].
> 
> OK, so it is wrong to talk about "trusted" and/or "valid" "GPG
> signatures" like the original one.  We should say "... have GPG
> signatures that were signed by valid key" (not "trusted" key)?

Well, the GnuPG documentation also talks of valid signatures,
  and it is a convenient short-hand:

  https://www.gnupg.org/documentation/manuals/gpgme/Verify.html
  
On the other hand, being more explicit here cannot hurt.

> Thanks for clarification.  The distinction between trusted and valid
> should at least be in the log message and possibly (if we can find a
> good way to flow it into the description) added to the documentation.

Ok.  I will have a second go at the patch (with the split you requested,
  a more explicit description and an explanation in the commit msg).

What is the prefered way to send a second version of a patchset here? Just git-email-ing it here In-Reply-To the first mail?

>     Verify that the tip commit of the side branch being merged is
>     signed with a valid key (i.e. a key that is signed by a key that
>     the user set the trust level as trusted), and abort the merge if
>     it is not.

I would rather see something like

Show 5 quoted lines

>     Verify that the tip commit of the side branch being merged is
>     signed with a valid key, i.e. a key that has a valid uid: in the
>     default trust model, this means it has been signed by a trusted key.
>     If the tip commit of the side branch is not signed with a valid key,
>     the merge is aborted.

It's unfortunately more verbose, but I don't want to make promises
  about GnuPG's behaviour that depends on the user's configuration.

Best,

kf