On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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.
No, there's nothing really bad with adding the signature to the merge
commit if you do make a merge. It's the fact that it currently makes a
non-ff merge when that is pointless that hurts.
That said, adding the signature from an upstream tag doesn't really
seem to be hugely useful. I'm not seeing much of an upside, in other
words. I'd *expect* that people would pick up upstream tags
regardless, no?
Linus
--
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
