Johan Herland <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > What about having one notes ref per branch? If/when the branch is merged, > the associated notes ref containing the annotations for the commits on that > branch would be merged as well (using "git notes merge"). That is a crude workaround that you could (with help from users) make it work, but it does not change the fact that the current mechanism to transfer and integrate notes across repositories is a bad match for what the "signed commit" type annotations wants to achieve. In fact, the need for such a workaround is an illustration of how bad a match the mechanism is. When you merge a history that has commit A into another history that did not have that commit, the act of creating a merge commit itself should be enough to make the resulting history to contain that commit. The commit DAG already expresses it, and if a parallel "notes" mechanism needs to be futzed with to match that DAG, and command like "merge" needs to be told to help that process, that is a shortcoming of the "notes" mechanism. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html