From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 23:10:05 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Documentation/git-push.txt: Document when --signed may fail
Message-ID: <xmqqr3n5fovm.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <1439492451-11233-2-git-send-email-dborowitz@google.com>

Dave Borowitz <dborowitz@google.com> writes:

> Like --atomic, --signed will fail if the server does not advertise the
> necessary capability. In addition, it requires gpg on the client side.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Borowitz <dborowitz@google.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/git-push.txt | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-push.txt b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> index 135d810..f8b8b8b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-push.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> @@ -137,7 +137,9 @@ already exists on the remote side.
>  	GPG-sign the push request to update refs on the receiving
>  	side, to allow it to be checked by the hooks and/or be
>  	logged.  See linkgit:git-receive-pack[1] for the details
> -	on the receiving end.
> +	on the receiving end.  If the `gpg` executable is not available,
> +	or if the server does not support signed pushes, the push will
> +	fail.

Looks good.

I am wondering if another mode of failure is worth mentioning: `gpg`
available, you have _some_ keys, but signingkey configured does not
match any of the keys.

Note that I said "am wondering", which is very different from "I
think we should also describe".

Thanks.