Michał Górny wrote: > On Wed, 2018-08-15 at 14:31 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> It's not clear to me that the name is_status or SIGNATURE_STATUS >> captures what this field represents. Aren't these all sigcheck >> statuses? Can you describe briefly what distinguishes the cases where >> this should be 0 versus 1? [...] > Maybe it should be EXCLUSIVE_STATUS > or something like that, to distinguish from things that can occur > simultaneously to them. Thanks. Makes sense. [...] >> Can we have a test to make sure this behavior doesn't regress? See >> t/README for an overview of the test framework and "git grep -e gpg t/" >> for some examples. > > Will try. Do I presume correctly that I should include the commit > object with the double signature instead of hacking git to construct it? > ;-) Good question. You can hack away with a new program in t/helper/, or you can make your test do object manipulation with "git cat-file commit <object>" and "git hash-object -t commit -w --stdin". If you run into trouble, just let the list know and I'm happy to try to help. (Or if you would like real-time help, I'm usually in #git-devel on freenode.) Jonathan
