Re: Git-commits mailing list feed.
- From
- Paul Jakma <paul@clubi.ie>
- Date
- Apr 25, 2005, 03:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <Pine.LNX.4.62.0504250435050.14200@sheen.jakma.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.62.0504250413200.14200@sheen.jakma.org>
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Paul Jakma wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
> You dont even need it, see my other mail. If: > > - the signature is an object and added after the commit object > > - tools know that signatures are 'proxies of' or precursors to the > objects they are signing (which makes sense, a signature by > definition refers to something else) > > - the signature object refers to the object it is signing (eg a > 'Signing <object ID>' header) > > Then head can simply be the signature object and tools can find the > commit by following the 'Signing' field of the signature (they dont > even need to check the signature is valid). No index lookup needed.
> You only need the index for historical verification really, and you can > always generate an index if needs be. (and have the tools maintain it).
Uh, I have no idea whether verifying a signature of a commit object is sufficient, ie equivalent to signing each file.
commit refers to tree objects, which I presume lists the SHA-1 object IDs of files, but IIRC Linus already described why a signature of the commit object should not be used to trust the rest of commit.. (i'll have to find his mail). If so, an index is required.
regards,
-- Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: Old programmers never die, they just hit account block limit.