> i don't see why signing the pkgbuild is required when signing the whole
> commit achieves the same thing and is easily verifiable with: git pull
> --rebase --verify-signatures

I think every time we talk on exclusively basing a design just cause we have 
git, we must remember that its not only Parabola PKGBUILDs we deal with. Most 
of our PKGBUILDs are inclusive of Packages from Arch too and abslibre `does 
not` clone them at all. So the user is left with either 1) use abs, 2) Go to 
Arch's git web interface and individually download them. 

This argument has been discussed before and I have repeatedly brought it to 
everyone's attention that we can't have an inconsistent solution like "use git 
for Parabola's PKGBUILDs,  and use Arch's git interface (which does have 
PKGBUILDs of non-free packages too) for majority of the packages that come from 
[core], [extra] and [community]". This is a very dirty way of source code 
management. So before anyone suggests in "IGNORING" abs completely cause " we 
have git " please do remember the PKGBUILDs that come from Arch. Unless we fix 
that part, abs remains the "consistent" method of downloading PKGBUILDs without 
confusing the user and referring them to the non-free arch git interface, and 
is henceforth important to sign pkgbuilds too.  

-- 
Icarious
GPG Public Key : 0x4428BA28AA2ACCD2
GPG Fingerprint : 6C37 E88E DD0B F042 7A15  676E 4428 BA28 AA2A CCD2
www.gnuos.in

Attachment: pgpIuBlkXRIMO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to