From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id iAD6BIOG/F4vbQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 12:50:11 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id gMq5AIOG/F7xTwAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 12:50:11 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1E899403CB for ; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 12:50:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:50268 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jqcBi-0008NQ-SG for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 08:50:06 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41392) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jqcBe-0008NF-Nn for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 08:50:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:40971) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jqcBe-0003QG-EI for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 08:50:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jqcBe-0000YK-A4 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 08:50:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#42048] [PATCH 6/6] services: provenance: Save channel introductions. Resent-From: zimoun Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 12:50:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 42048 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: Ricardo Wurmus , 42048@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 42048-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B42048.15936077662076 (code B ref 42048); Wed, 01 Jul 2020 12:50:02 +0000 Received: (at 42048) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Jul 2020 12:49:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52517 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jqcB3-0000XQ-NG for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 08:49:25 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f65.google.com ([209.85.221.65]:35110) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jqcB0-0000XB-0d for 42048@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 08:49:23 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f65.google.com with SMTP id z2so1410143wrp.2 for <42048@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 05:49:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2mDgfAVz1BEgauB5N0nOssdsw9Z131nzci4IZqVNI5E=; b=BC7Q7Q5BjNk5TTZAOLAfFXg5nzm+lvCdE17M0FSn9wKHHFCVXVh2i+Pn3MTeEbN5Rs L2ys0S/NF4Yhkhp2cBZqhnIdCxgmQwE6NVIP2iNomw9DJMwiompTM5f/TWl7ukiTx4ZW LJw0CDcaimCMpRYvCAoWuxMRB0ds59N3apSpS+25AHNWiw0IvaPVcoH5cJTVmXCeJKrj aifYNLsdldLkTxVQvBdRGuW1eRPaF8R04DuekmkehPu6+pEuPXw+CCHLLsbCp5DyVVFk szUutjjlrtja1a5CtUob5+YP6agjaxKIg8Inog3pCsgVsiHW6oZCEnbzIGwsX09QKs9R YNWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2mDgfAVz1BEgauB5N0nOssdsw9Z131nzci4IZqVNI5E=; b=B82QHbp3B4Wu3OTMn8CUSUJKkJFp8fuIMrEIIR7WqnvAjQeftOqW0j73zFgL2mCNo2 +QP1i8D0Xq+2uStWiUZ6FCYJ6rCp5/jElRPREdhhFgye+Zp/45Z5wh78ggSIy6OP2sA0 vy/9LObI1b424Lv6IKro58AHsDMMgAWfBPVaDRJzIwzzEN4OtA50Lh07WehQLrH+NRs3 eaxtrQNbq22nLE32iFR2TwM71EF19yu2Hx7tVZ0DMtT8X0VXO7RiB/bpLWvq+qTNOoRy ISgGJ+CxONZaAJS4CK4KG13wXj0VCL+CBBuKo+toDcv2w3L5g2tXj6qnrkG8Ctv86wBz 60Rw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ZS6nytZTXkYf0xUuTMoB742NAwvCNviuLiWTbNeVM/bDtIGJw aap+IrL+lpzMcb67GmnOHGQSlh1i/Xs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzW3M4tUD8+kVeVDSeQLSUO5tVQl566n9T56SpD8+bUTFTvyTiQEx/yvBwk3zAmZthCcPkNcg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:fd8e:: with SMTP id d14mr26639352wrr.202.1593607755676; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 05:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lili ([2a01:e0a:59b:9120:65d2:2476:f637:db1e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a4sm7822421wrg.80.2020.07.01.05.49.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 01 Jul 2020 05:49:14 -0700 (PDT) From: zimoun In-Reply-To: <87r1tvzb6s.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20200625211605.29316-1-ludo@gnu.org> <20200625211605.29316-6-ludo@gnu.org> <87v9j8mtx9.fsf@elephly.net> <87imf847sr.fsf@gnu.org> <86lfk3aa9p.fsf@gmail.com> <87r1tvzb6s.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 14:49:11 +0200 Message-ID: <86d05f9z94.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (rsa verify failed) header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=BC7Q7Q5B; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: 0.09 X-TUID: olqf+sf6cKoh On Wed, 01 Jul 2020 at 14:12, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > Oh I=E2=80=99m sorry, I think I misunderstood your question back then! My poor English does not help either. :-) >>> With this patch set, someone pulling guix-bimsb would just end up >>> pulling guix-past unauthenticated; there=E2=80=99s not even a warning. >>> >>> (There=E2=80=99s currently a warning in (guix channels), but only when = pulling >>> an unauthenticated 'guix channel. It=E2=80=99s perhaps too early to ha= ve that >>> warning enabled for all channels. WDYT?) >> >> Enable the warning appears to me a good idea because this dependency is >> like "doing something I am not necessary aware in my back". > > I=E2=80=99m talking about the warning that says =E2=80=9Cthis channel is > unauthenticated=E2=80=9D, which is mostly orthogonal to the discussion at= hand. > The reason I said it=E2=80=99s perhaps too early to enable it is that peo= ple > haven=E2=80=99t had a chance to make their channel =E2=80=9Cauthenticable= =E2=80=9D yet. Well, the possible scenarii are: when pulling guix-bimsb which ends up to pull guix-past: 1- unauthenticated guix-bimsb and unauthenticated guix-past 2- authenticated guix-bimsb and unauthenticated guix-past 3- unauthenticated guix-bimsb and authenticated guix-past 4- authenticated guix-bimsb and authenticated guix-past The #1 and #4 do not deserve a warning. The point #3 neither and even the authentication of guix-past should be turned off, at least now. The point #2 requires a warning. Because if I am pulling a authenticated channel, I expect that all the code it pulls is authenticated which will not be the case, so IMHO it deserves a warning. Then it is up to the guix-bimsb channel to add an introduction for the dependency using the format you described. Cheers, simon