Hi, On Thu, 13 Mar 2008, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 01:16:44PM +0100, Miklos Vajna wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 12:55:11PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > The latter can be remedied (somewhat) by encrypting each object > > > individually. In that case, .gitattributes can help (you should be > > > able to find a mail to that extent, which I sent no more than 2 > > > weeks ago). However, you must make sure that the encryption is > > > repeatable, i.e. two different encryption runs _must_ result in > > > _identical_ output. > > > > afaik, this is not the case for gpg. > > No, and you wouldn't want to use gpg because of the overhead it adds > around an encrypted message. To the contrary: if your files are small (which they are most likely), you _want_ the overhead, in order to make the encryption harder to crack. AFAICT gpg is a good all-round encryption tool, and reinventing the wheel just for encrypting things in a git repository just does not cut it. Ciao, Dscho -- 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
