Re: [PATCH v2] gpg-interface: use more status letters

> 
> 
> On 28/09/16 20:59, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
>  
>>> +  "X" for a good expired signature, or good signature made by an expired key,
>>
>> As an attempt to clarify that we cover both EXPSIG and EXPKEYSIG
>> cases, I think this is good enough.  I may have phrased the former
>> slightly differently, though: "a good signature that has expired".
>>
>> I have no strong opinion if we want to stress that we cover both
>> cases, though, which is I think what Ramsay's comment was about.
> 
> Kinda! ;-)
> 
> I'm not sure that it is a good idea to mash both EXPSIG and EXPKEYSIG
> into one status letter, but I was also fishing for some information
> about EXPSIG. I was only vaguely aware that a signature could expire
> _independently_ of the key used to do the signing. Also, according to
> https://www.gnupg.org/documentation/manuals/gnupg/Automated-signature-checking.html
> for the EXPSIG case 'Note, that this case is currently not implemented.'

> Hmm, I guess these are so closely related that a single status letter
> is OK, but I think I would prefer your phrasing; namely:
> 
>  "X" for a good signature that has expired, or a good signature made with an expired key,
>