Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] fast-export, fast-import: implement signed-commits
- From
Luke Shumaker <lukeshu@lukeshu.com>
- Date
- Apr 30, 2021, 17:07 UTC
- Message-ID
- <87eeerpupk.wl-lukeshu@lukeshu.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqim44fyjj.fsf@gitster.g>
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 17:42:24 -0600, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 22 quoted lines
>
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I do get that we might have to use warn-strip as the default anyway
> > just because some existing tools might rely on it, but do you have any
> > examples outside of git-filter-repo? Given the filter-repo bug
> > reports I've gotten with users being surprised at commit signatures
> > being stripped (despite the fact that this is documented -- users
> > don't always read the documentation), I'd argue that changing to
> > --signed-commits=abort as the default is probably a good bugfix for
> > both fast-export and for filter-repo.
>
> Thanks. The "filter-repo already gets bug reports from the users"
> is a valuable input when deciding if it is reasonable to sell the
> behaviour change as a bugfix to our users.
>
> Perhaps teaching fast-export to pay attention to two environment
> variables that say "when no --signed-{tag,commit}=<disposition>"
> command line option is given, use this behaviour" would be a good
> enough escape hatch for existing tools and their users, while they
> are waiting for their tools to get updated with the new option you
> are planning to add?Between Elijah being on-board with changing the default, and the suggested env-var escape hatch, you've won me over.
I'll change the default to 'abort' and implement an env-var escape hatch. Any suggestions on how to name it? `FAST_EXPORT_SIGNED_COMMITS`? Should I give it a `GIT_` prefix? `FILTER_BRANCH_SQUELCH_WARNING` doesn't have a `GIT_` prefix...
Show 8 quoted lines
> Also, I am glad that you brought up another possible behaviour that > Luke's patch did not add. Exporting existing signatures that may > become invalid and deciding what to do with them on the receiving > end would be a good option to have. And that would most likely have > to be done at "fast-import" end, as a commit that "fast-export" > expected to retain its object name if its export stream were applied > as-is may not retain the object name when the export stream gets > preprocessed before being fed to "fast-import".
Elijah suggested that on an earlier version of the patchset too. I agree that it's a splendid idea, but I'm not willing to be the one to do the work of implementing it... at least not in the next few months.
-- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker