From: Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 20:49:57 GMT
Subject: Re: Is the sha256 object format experimental or not?
Message-ID: <20210513204957.5g76czb5bk3thlep@meerkat.local>
In-Reply-To: <20210513202919.GE11882@localhost>

On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 01:29:19PM -0700, dwh@linuxprogrammer.org wrote:
> 3. The key material used for identifying contributors needs to move into
>   the repos themselves for many reasons but the most important two
>   reasons are (1) the repo comes with all of the data necessary to
>   verify all of the digital signatures (i.e. solving the PKI problem
>   for a project) and (2) to track the provenance of the public keys and
>   other related data that each contributor uses. If Git repos contain
>   provenance logs that are controlled and maintained by each
>   contributor, those logs can also contain digital signatures over the
>   code of conduct and the developer certificate of origin and other
>   governing documents for a project that are legally binding (i.e.
>   follow eIDAS and other legal digital signature rules). Solving the
>   PKI problem alone makes digitally signing commits infinitely more
>   useful and will drive adoption. Solving the non-repudiable provenance
>   problem is the raison d'être of organizations like the Linux
>   Foundation. I think Git should align itself with where technology is
>   heading on that front.

Dave:

Check out what we're doing as part of patatt and b4:
https://pypi.org/project/patatt/

It takes your keyring-in-git idea and runs with it -- it would be good to have
your input while the project is still young and widely unknown. :)

-K