From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-52093-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1SaHwp-0006Rv-2t
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 01 Jun 2012 02:50:43 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 27B40E0521;
Fri, 1 Jun 2012 02:50:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93025E04C8
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 02:49:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bkcjk13 with SMTP id jk13so1628632bkc.40
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 31 May 2012 19:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=7wOivCv65xjv8KiyG1QjKtI61gVm7V/Td/KM++3Rztg=;
b=vDVdvdGER28NsOGqE3z3VBlYM2yE2dmC9mEX5c1jvM+5GdRrlN06qjikF7bYmufcSY
M6cx7OtDnx/ooany8qKTkCr0u1/Q2/ySG3/2VtU7Ng7Yhe3DCvmUE9kVyHSsGadg7xCj
wFhqv9bs/fQFTVDSBWbVwC1mT9fSMvN7qymVss1NJ4pypMWdZB9+w+tJCoXxmIneUtt0
zf8F2/zO3qHW12HkW6n6EIzhwMKkucEL8f7F3YHYO1ApMnxcgktZoknH1OPhWUVzyq0J
ZciHxAgWBqtwatpWh6pgL3YnR+KcoNgoejoPH8wKHg87YyLHwqfMpaxyiXELiqfghuqM
lpLA==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.155.139 with SMTP id s11mr426406bkw.106.1338518976569;
Thu, 31 May 2012 19:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.204.149.211 with HTTP; Thu, 31 May 2012 19:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAATnKFDDg-3Kp-z5STFa8QxMPyd9EcQRoXkZMkeF2LkpW0V3Xw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ddd8ff651a1f5d00ea13fbd9e105ddfa@omrb.pnpi.spb.ru>
<CAGfcS_kOCDZ6Ur37+YYx4DR+1b3c-VWE6eNiefS7HJbqtuKKJA@mail.gmail.com>
<pan.2012.05.30.09.38.51@cox.net>
<CAKmKYaCgdi8uFssF=7rMhAunAs4=qRPgycT0uJYLVGQOhXkuLA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGfcS_kezhc3ZyfU6Kt1kXCDZqd3VydTjF3BeSt2moEDkbaOSA@mail.gmail.com>
<pan.2012.05.30.13.06.45@cox.net>
<robbat2-20120530T183226-760252197Z@orbis-terrarum.net>
<CAKmKYaBPFXtgPVtY4UQvnD1AjN0oYRz0cDLmZuGzPNNSGnS9YQ@mail.gmail.com>
<robbat2-20120531T163959-415201853Z@orbis-terrarum.net>
<CAGfcS_mSMrS5oYJL3+v2qiCN=efNPestH3je2L7fLvmch2sdVQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20120531191804.GA24784@linux1>
<20120531213303.57529c85@pomiocik.lan>
<79847e2567d341102303362662063b0d@omrb.pnpi.spb.ru>
<CAATnKFDDg-3Kp-z5STFa8QxMPyd9EcQRoXkZMkeF2LkpW0V3Xw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 22:49:36 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: sfLvXJPZoPWQgFor0Mg9gBT1jcE
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_nGgOpA2BdPOA++M3EeG6j34KpAsNexuZ=zN6s-YqqW5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: de8bbdb6-f3fd-43c9-a171-3fbe13954a80
X-Archives-Hash: e3701e134ff8612610d491f23d727cc5
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Kent Fredric <kentfredric@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just I haven't worked out what happens when the SHA1 of the 'parent'
> header changes, which *will* change if the rebase is anything other
> than a fast-forward.
>
> If that SHA1 changes, the gpg signature will surely fail?
Rebasing doesn't modify past commits - it creates new ones and the
past ones are no longer in the history of the current head. So, it
doesn't break the old signatures so much as discard them. You would
need to create new signatures in their place, presumably from whoever
performed the rebase.
I'm trying to glean what I can from the little info out there about
how the new commit signatures work, but I don't think that you can use
signatures to convey authorship if later authors are going to rebase
the branch. The situation is not unlike what we have now with
manifests.
As far as I can tell if you want to do work outside of master, and
then get those commits into master but preserve all the past
signatures in the history of master, then you'd need to do a merge
commit, so that all the deltas to do the merge are in a separate
commit which is then signed by the person doing the merge.
Rich