From: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 06:33:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit: teach --gpg-sign option
Message-ID: <4E9291B6.2090201@drmicha.warpmail.net>
In-Reply-To: <7v8votrhbr.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 09.10.2011 23:22:
> Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
> 
>> I just noticed that this format differs from the one of signed
>> tags. What special reason is there for the "sig " indentation?
> 
> Read the part of the message you are quoting.

I certainly did, and certainly did not find any mention. Do you think I
would have asked otherwise? I'm trying to be helpful by testing out a
patch in flight. That is: *I* am trying to be helpful.

This
> The lines of GPG detached signature are placed in new header lines, after
> the standard tree/parent/author/committer headers, instead of tucking the
> signature block at the end of the commit log message text (similar to how
> signed tag is done), for multiple reasons:
gave me the impression that commit signatures are done "similar to how
signed tag is done".

*After* doing several "cat-file" and after your insisting that you had
described the "sig " indent I come to the conclusion that you
implemented it this way "instead of... [doing it] similar to how signed
tag is done".

Before that, I misread those paragraphs (togetheter with the
non-existing object format doc) to mean that have a section in the
object which is ignored automatically, which is where tag signatures are
(while in fact they are not) and where commit signatures will go.

I have to say I dislike the fact that we would have different signature
formats. But I have spent too much time on this unnecessarily already.

Michael