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-52121-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>) id 1SaUUq-0005UW-Lz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:14:40 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 01F78E0595; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 16:14:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D951FE0552 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 16:13:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: djc) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C6601B4009 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 16:13:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by werj55 with SMTP id j55so1673913wer.40 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 01 Jun 2012 09:13:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.143.200 with SMTP id l50mr2442699wej.58.1338567197699; Fri, 01 Jun 2012 09:13:17 -0700 (PDT) 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 10.216.168.82 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 09:12:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <CAGfcS_kZwkattS0rWTxZF+JENEj_JrO+5iEX_L+4C0qP=LFcHg@mail.gmail.com> References: <ddd8ff651a1f5d00ea13fbd9e105ddfa@omrb.pnpi.spb.ru> <3375796.AWLuLamy3m@grenadine> <CAATnKFD7VE6GQ2bAtzTqfTgXaXVtDgfhDLexRP1jbFrgJ0yV7w@mail.gmail.com> <1636308.cYuZxjJslQ@grenadine> <CAGfcS_kZwkattS0rWTxZF+JENEj_JrO+5iEX_L+4C0qP=LFcHg@mail.gmail.com> From: Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 18:12:57 +0200 Message-ID: <CAKmKYaAwzmbnfi7h1AWhbDVikF1QSAQG3LF5uqP86W96HWO2gw@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 92eb09f8-551d-4f4a-82bb-0275cae71c00 X-Archives-Hash: 8ecc0ffc9c0ed6cea3d04322a698879f On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote: > If you want the tree to be traceable to Gentoo devs, then rewriting > the signatures is probably a good thing. I'd say that signing the merge commit is good enough. It says the Gentoo dev who merged it has reviewed the changes and can be held responsible for them. One could even say that he mediates a web-of-trust to the more casual contributor who signed the original csets. Cheers, Dirkjan