Re: GPG signing for git commit?
From: Robin H. Johnson <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:46:44
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 03:30:51PM +1000, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:55 AM, Robin H. Johnson [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
One of the spots that we're looking for in this, is a model something like what follows. Firstly, a "proxy maintainer" (PM) is a developer with commit rights to the central repo, that's willing to proxy commits by an outside source for some specific package. Think of them as the kernel subsystem maintainer, but many more of them. The PM is still expected to verify the work before passing it on the central repo. So we have a commit with author+committer being the outside source, and now we want to record (in an easily reviewable fashion) that a specific changeset was introduced to the central tree by the PM. Not sure of the best route to trace this data. Signing the SHA1 makes the most sense, but need to be able to do that without polluting the tag namespace. If the changeset does not have an associated signature, we'd like to reject it at the central repo.How about signing the tree SHA-1 and putting the signature in commit message? It's like gpg way of saying Signed-off-by. If the committer wants to sign again before pushing out, he could amend the commit, append his signature there; or make a no-change commit to contain his signature (probably from git-commit-tree because iirc git-commit won't let you make no-change commit)
Hmm, I like the sound of that, but I'm concerned it might be difficult to enforce. If rewrite-history ever happens, it's also invalidated. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy E-Mail : robbat2@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
Attachments
- (unnamed) [application/pgp-signature] 330 bytes