From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Marc=2DAndr=E9_Lureau?= Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 1/6] tag: read signature Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 20:25:21 +0200 Message-ID: References: <7vskm6xrm7.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 22 19:27:01 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LbJ2T-0001nk-Dc for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:26:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752818AbZBVSZZ convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 13:25:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752769AbZBVSZY (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 13:25:24 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.187]:1817 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752652AbZBVSZX convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 13:25:23 -0500 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d21so369560nfb.21 for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 10:25:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=fUcY71NKXD0TFXohWAuy5/x8Mf8yK2SF4rSRclVFOsA=; b=MrUeNLc96tj2gVIJF0iPChrB7E9auf3rcKnYt8ao4M3TwipU5ZzlFEVnHQIARPrEpE PshWXIjjzCAZJMGknki1nm/cZ82LGVbUG/a8s6Mz+nYDRGVE70QL1ZRd87s97/nQO7X6 ZkGMmKRyOIh4+QGtYps2KwcEzPY85u4U7mjk0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=TY4xpX23p3HK61i8522ustDSFiTM2f8QLHm9tS97vg1ljEBTCp50rqLUcXoxzTgWak vJNgftgrQ1wnD7VZ51UuP2wGMXsoGz9J4cdkqy0rxyyqAsxnX5EYv1PlxIiuX+TMe+I9 p5hShIOayTCP4p8rVjDrpmlMkO+RBjtFt2AFw= Received: by 10.210.112.4 with SMTP id k4mr2736775ebc.0.1235327121514; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 10:25:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7vskm6xrm7.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Junio C Hamano wro= te: > Marc-Andr=E9 Lureau writes: > >> diff --git a/tag.h b/tag.h >> index 7a0cb00..bc2cab3 100644 >> --- a/tag.h >> +++ b/tag.h >> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ struct tag { >> struct object object; >> struct object *tagged; >> char *tag; >> - char *signature; /* not actually implemented */ >> + char *signature; >> }; > > I do not speak for Daniel, but I think the original intent of "signat= ure" > is about the GnuPG signature, not the "tagger" field. > > And this is not an objection. The use of GnuPG is accidental and at = the > low level of the object layer like this codepath we would not necessa= rily > want to be married to it. Grabbing and parsing the tagger field like= your > patches 1/6 and 2/6 did would be more appropriate. > > But then we would probably want to rename this field "tagger" (and th= en > the timestamp field you add in the next patch "tagger_date"). > Yes, I though the same. But when I saw the way it was parsed before (the value of sig_line), I was not sure about naming. I agree it would be better to name it "tagger". regards, --=20 Marc-Andr=E9 Lureau Sent from: Helsinki Southern Finland Finland.