Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > - I do think that we might want a "--no-signatures" for the specific > case of merging signed tags without actually taking the signature > (because it's a "upstream" repo). The "--ff-only" thing is *too* > strict. Sometimes you really do want to merge in new code, disallowing > it entirely is tough. I agree that "--ff-only" thing is too strict and sometimes you would want to allow back-merges, but when you do allow such a back-merge, is there a reason you want it to be --no-signatures merge? When a subtree maintainer decides to merge a stable release point from you with a good reason, I do not see anything wrong in recording that the resulting commit _did_ merge what you released with a signature. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
