Tom Grennan <tmgrennan@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 09:22:44PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>Tom Grennan <tmgrennan@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> Wouldn't you want Shawn and Jeff to tag the object (commit, tree, or >>> blob) that you had tagged? >> >>No. >> >>We _designed_ our tag objects so that they are capable of pointing at >>another tag, not the object that is pointed at that other tag. And that >>is the example usage I gave you. >> >>The statement by Shawn and Jeff, "This tag is Gitster's" is exactly that. >>It was not about asserting the authenticity of the commit. It was about >>the tag object I created. > > Hmm, how about "git verify-tag [[-v] [--to]] <tag|object>"? > With "--to", all tags to the given tag (or object) are verified. > Without "--to" just the given <tag> is verified. > >>> gitster$ git verify-tag --pointed v1.7.10 >>> tag v1.7.10: OK >> >>Just saying "$name: OK" will *never* be acceptable. "A signature made by >>any key in my keychain is fine" is not the usual use case. At least the >>output needs to be "Good signature from X". > > OK, I'll have to play with the gpg --verify-options. If it wasn't clear enough from my other message, I would rather not to see any change to --verify codepath as the first step. Don't you think that the simplest and cleanest first step is to add --points-at to the list mode, so that with help from "| xargs git tag -v" you can bulk-verify without any other change? -- 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