Ron Aaron wrote: > On Tuesday 23 February 2010 18:16:59 D. Richard Hipp wrote: > >> I get the impression that I am perhaps the only person in the world >> who cares about PGP signing their check-ins. So rather than burden >> all other users with having to figure out PGP/GPG, what it is, how it >> works, and why Fossil cares about it, I think it is better to simply >> Fossil for the common user and leave PGP signing off by default. This >> helps to make Fossil more accessible to newbies. > > I would be more interested if it were possible to require the checkin be > signed, and perhaps if there were a way to only accept signatures from a > whitelist of keys. As it is currently, though I am a real fan of GPG I > don't see much utility in the way it is currently used in Fossil.
+1 for being able to require checkins be signed. Otherwise it's really easy to get a mix of unsigned and signed checkins (if for no other reason than one's own machine / environment is temporarily misconfigured) that is of dubious value. -- Daniel JB Clark | http://pobox.com/~dclark _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
