Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] tag: use pgp_verify_function in tag -v call

quoted

diff --git a/builtin/verify-tag.c b/builtin/verify-tag.c
index f776778..8abc357 100644
--- a/builtin/verify-tag.c
+++ b/builtin/verify-tag.c

@@ -30,6 +30,8 @@ int cmd_verify_tag(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
 {
 	int i = 1, verbose = 0, had_error = 0;
 	unsigned flags = 0;
+	unsigned char sha1[20];
+	const char *name;
 	const struct option verify_tag_options[] = {
 		OPT__VERBOSE(&verbose, N_("print tag contents")),
 		OPT_BIT(0, "raw", &flags, N_("print raw gpg status output"), GPG_VERIFY_RAW),

@@ -46,8 +48,16 @@ int cmd_verify_tag(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
 	if (verbose)
 		flags |= GPG_VERIFY_VERBOSE;
 
-	while (i < argc)
-		if (pgp_verify_tag(argv[i++], flags))
+	while (i < argc) {
+		name = argv[i++];
+		if (get_sha1(name, sha1)) {
+			error("tag '%s' not found.", name);
 			had_error = 1;
+		}
+
+		if (pgp_verify_tag(name, NULL, sha1, flags))
+			had_error = 1;
+
+	}

So this is a good example of the rippling I mentioned earlier.

As a side note, it might actually be an improvement for pgp_verify_tag
to take a sha1 (so that git-tag is sure that it is verifying the same
object that it is printing), but that refactoring should probably come
separately, I think.

-Peff

Just to be sure, this refactoring is something we should still include
in this set of patches, right? I think that otherwise we'd lose the
desambigutaion that git tag -v does in this patch.

I also think that most of the rippling is gone if we use and adaptor as
you suggested. Should I add a patch on top of this to support a sha1 as
part for gpg_verify_tag()?

Thanks!
-Santiago.