From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
Subject: bug#22883: Trustable "guix pull"
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2016 09:51:45 +0200
Message-ID: <877fe4hy3y.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
References: <87io14sqoa.fsf@dustycloud.org>
	<87fustj59o.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> <874m98vbcg.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60841)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1b9Svi-0006T0-EM
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2016 03:57:07 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1b9Sve-0007BR-W8
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2016 03:57:06 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:42526)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1b9Sve-0007BM-Sz
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2016 03:57:02 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.22883.B22883.14651133907550@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <874m98vbcg.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?="'s
	message of "Sun, 05 Jun 2016 00:27:27 +0200")
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix/>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "bug-Guix" <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: 22883@debbugs.gnu.org, Justus Winter <justus@gnupg.org>, neal@walfield.org

On Sun,  5 Jun 2016 00:27, ludo@gnu.org said:

> cannot or shouldn=E2=80=99t try to guess what=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Cbest=E2=
=80=9D, IMO.  So in this case,
> we keep the default names, =E2=80=98gpg2=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98gpgv2=E2=
=80=99.
>
> Do you think we should rename those files?

Given that Guix is a new distro you should really try to get rid of 1.4
and only use 2.1.  For Windows we use the name "gpg" for a long time now
and there is a configure option --enable-gpg2-is-gpg to make it easier.

> We sign commits and it=E2=80=99s wonderful; now all we need is tools to a=
ctually
> use those signatures to authenticate checkouts.  :-)

Right - Although I sign my commits,e other GnuPG hackers don't do it,
and thus for me there is no strong need to verify the commits. But we
should have these tools.


Shalom-Salam,

   Werner

--=20
Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
    /* EFH in Erkrath: https://alt-hochdahl.de/haus */