Re: [PATCH] tag: add tag.gpgSign config option to force all tags be GPG-signed

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Mkrtchyan, Tigran wrote:
>> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> Tigran Mkrtchyan wrote:
>
>>>> In some workflows we have no control on how git command is executed,
>>>> however a signed tags are required.
>>>
>>> Don't leave me hanging: this leaves me super curious.  Can you tell me
>>> more about these workflows?
>>
>> Well, this is a build/release process where we can't pass additional
>> command line options to git. TO be hones, is case of annotated tags
>> there is already option tag.forceSignAnnotated. However, non annotated
>> tags are not forced to be signed.
>>
>> Additionally, the proposed option is symmetric with commit.gpgSign.
>
> Now I'm even more curious.

I started digging and found
https://public-inbox.org/git/20131105112840.GZ4589@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
which is an answer to "Why do we have commit.gpgSign?" which is
a very similar question to begin with.

Maybe the answer is also similar (bonus points if the answer also touches
when to prefer one over the other)?



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux