From: Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>
Cc: Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com>,
Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>,
Christopher Baines <mail@cbaines.net>,
guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Rebasing or merging? [was: Re: 01/03: gnu: wxwidgets: Add libxtst to inputs.]
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2023 22:07:08 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZIfPTHM1W-1xsreY@jasmine.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y1kp8q11.fsf@gmail.com>
On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 08:47:54PM -0400, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> I'm not sure how that'd work, since Git only allows a single PGP
> signature per commit, as far as I can tell. When you rewrite the
> history (by using rebase, say), the existing signatures of the rewritten
> (rebased) commits are replaced with new ones generated from your key.
Is it so bad to re-sign commits on feature branches that we should lose
the easy-to-read history of rebased branches?
To me, it's much easier to understand and review a branch that has been
updated by rebasing rather than merging. I think that counts for a lot.
Do many people feel the same way?
Re-signing the commits is messy but I don't think there's even been a
consensus that it's very bad.
I think that re-signing commits while rebasing is consistent with our
security model which (as I understand it) considers committers' and their
machines to be trusted. And that the meaning of the signature is merely
that the committed changeset was definitively made by someone with the
key.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-13 2:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <168610879676.2825.9044237296073582277@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org>
[not found] ` <20230607033317.826FCC23EDC@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org>
2023-06-07 10:59 ` 01/03: gnu: wxwidgets: Add libxtst to inputs Christopher Baines
2023-06-11 3:17 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-06-11 8:44 ` Rebasing or merging? [was: Re: 01/03: gnu: wxwidgets: Add libxtst to inputs.] Andreas Enge
2023-06-11 21:25 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-06-11 22:40 ` Felix Lechner via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2023-06-12 0:47 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-06-12 1:10 ` Felix Lechner via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2023-06-12 12:22 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-06-12 13:13 ` Andreas Enge
2023-06-12 13:47 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-06-13 2:07 ` Leo Famulari [this message]
2023-06-14 1:32 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-06-20 17:15 ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2023-06-20 20:39 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-06-21 7:36 ` Josselin Poiret
2023-06-26 13:26 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-06-20 16:32 ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2023-06-11 9:25 ` 01/03: gnu: wxwidgets: Add libxtst to inputs Christopher Baines
2023-06-11 21:20 ` Maxim Cournoyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZIfPTHM1W-1xsreY@jasmine.lan \
--to=leo@famulari.name \
--cc=andreas@enge.fr \
--cc=felix.lechner@lease-up.com \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=mail@cbaines.net \
--cc=maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).