Re: the right to rewrite history to rectify the past (was Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive)

[Giovanni Biscuolo <g@xelera.eu>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1079 bytes --]

Hello pinoaffe,

pinoaffe <pinoaffe@gmail.com> writes:

[...]

> I think we, as Guix,
> - should examine if/how it is currently feasible to rewrite our git
> history,

it's not, see also:
https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2020/securing-updates/

> - should examine possible workarounds going forward,
> - should move towards something like UUIDs and petnames in the long run.
>
> (see https://spritelyproject.org/news/petname-systems.html).

I don't understand how using petnames, uuids or even a re:claimID
identity (see below) could solve the problem with "rewriting history" in
case a person wishes to change his or her previous _published_ name
(petname, uuid...) in an archived content-addressable storage system.

As a side note, other than the "petname system" please also consider
re:claimID from GNUnet:
https://www.gnunet.org/en/reclaim/index.html
https://www.gnunet.org/en/reclaim/motivation.html

[...]

Regards, Giovanni.


[1] https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2020/securing-updates/


-- 
Giovanni Biscuolo

Xelera IT Infrastructures

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 849 bytes --]