Hi all …

So we have 3 people who voted.
2 are in favor of disabling the requirement for signed commits (otluk, cdutz)
1 is in favor of keeping it (sruel)

So the majority is in favor of removing the requirement.

Chris


Von: ott.lukas.murena.io via dev <[email protected]>
Datum: Mittwoch, 5. August 2026 um 11:56
An: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Betreff: Re: Disabling the requirement for signed commits?

+1 for removing the requirement and starting educating people. could we add 
hints automated comment when someone opens a PR?

Am 5. August 2026 11:09:47 MESZ schrieb Christofer Dutz 
<[email protected]>:
>Hi all,
>
>As I just mentioned in slack … just duplicating this here for archiving.
>
>I would agree, if PLC4X was fearing being used as supply-chain attack. 
>Currently we want to enforce review-then-merge on PRs from outsiders. I think 
>with that in place, we’re reviewing things anyway so admittedly it wouldn’t 
>matter if a change we approved was from someone with a signature or not.
>
>I asked some of my peers throughout the foundation and there are quite few 
>projects actually requiring signed commits. I was told Logging requires that.
>But logging is in a quite unique spot here … it’s very low drive-by committers 
>(The core team is struggling to get new people to contribute at all). But the 
>risks of a supply-chain-attack going through is extremely high.
>So I agree that for some projects this is a good thing.
>
>The incubator suggests to have the setting turned off and to not require 
>signed commits. I guess for similar reasons as I’m arguing for.
>
>Most of the new folks coming here are not senior software engineers for who 
>such a requirement is not really an issue, but automation-engineers who never 
>really had to deal with stuff like this.
>My worries are, by raising the bars for people like that, that we might be 
>driving away or keeping away people who would have been able to provide real 
>help.
>
>So staying with +1 for removing the requirement.
>
>I am +1 for adding a recommendation for people to start signing their commits 
>however.
>
>Chris
>
>
>
>Von: Sebastian Rühl <[email protected]>
>Datum: Mittwoch, 5. August 2026 um 10:19
>An: [email protected] <[email protected]>
>Betreff: Re: Disabling the requirement for signed commits?
>
>-1
>
>If anything we would need a higher bar nowadays.
>AFAIK turned out to sign commits wasn't that hard anyway after all (according 
>to the slack discussion).
>
>This way it at least protects us from the first wave of slop
>
>- Sebastian
>
>On 2026/08/01 15:03:55 Christofer Dutz wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I remember when reviewing the proposed changes to the commit/merge rules I 
>> asked about the signature setting.
>> Turns out now you need to have signed commits in order to have changes go to 
>> develop.
>>
>> That raises the bar for contributions.
>>
>> I just want to make sure this is what we want and that this change didn’t 
>> sneak in with the approval requirement that we discussed.
>>
>> I would be in favor to accept signed contributions, but not to require them.
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>

Reply via email to