Re: [PATCH] tag: fix sign_buffer() call to create a signed tag

> > FWIW, I would have gone the other way, and fixed sign_buffer_ssh(). Your
> > solution here is future-proofing the tag code against other
> > sign_buffer_*() functions behaving like ssh. But it is also leaving
> > other sign_buffer() callers to introduce the same bug.
> >
> > Your documentation change at least makes that less likely. But given how
> > much of our code uses the "negative is error" convention, I wouldn't be
> > surprised to see it happen anyway.
> 
> Yeah, but other callers are prepared to honor the current return
> value convention used by gpg-interface, so "fixing" sign_buffer_ssh()
> would not give us any future-proofing.

> We could do belt and suspenders by tightening the other callers to
> only expect negative for errors (but then what should they do when
> they receive non-zero positive?  Should they BUG() out???) while
> teaching sign_buffer_ssh() that our convention is to return negative
> for an error, of course, but I am not sure if it that is worth it.