On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 07:26:29PM -0400, Santiago Torres Arias wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 11:07:01PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 12:02:11PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 11:46:56AM -0400, Santiago Torres Arias wrote: > > > > > > > I think that would be great, as we could make it simpler for verifiers > > > > to parse gpg output. > > > > > > Alternatively, we could make it an option to dump the --status-fd output > > > to stderr (or to a custom fd). That still leaves the caller with the > > > responsibility to parse gpg's output, but at least they're parsing the > > > machine-readable bits and not the regular human-readable stderr. > > > > Don't we already have that for verify-tag and verify-commit? I recall > > adding "--raw" for that very reason: > > I think this interface only shows you raw gpg output, but not any > --format= specifiers that you may want. The idea would be to support > both. Or am I missing something? My response was mostly in reply to Peff's suggestion that we have an option to dump the --status-fd output, which we have. I think that behavior properly belongs to verify-tag and verify-commit, which are plumbing. I'm not so sure that it's necessary to have the --status-fd output in git tag -v, which is more for interactive use, although I don't feel strongly about it. I think of --format as a tool I typically want to use on multiple of something, and while it's theoretically possible to distinguish multiple signatures by GnuPG's "NEWSIG", parsing multiple tags' worth of output between standard output and standard error is going to be pretty unpleasant. As I said, I don't feel strongly about it, so if you want to implement it, feel free. -- brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
