On 28/09/16 20:59, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael J Gruber <g...@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
>> + "X" for a good expired signature, or good signature made by an expired
> As an attempt to clarify that we cover both EXPSIG and EXPKEYSIG
> cases, I think this is good enough. I may have phrased the former
> slightly differently, though: "a good signature that has expired".
> I have no strong opinion if we want to stress that we cover both
> cases, though, which is I think what Ramsay's comment was about.
I'm not sure that it is a good idea to mash both EXPSIG and EXPKEYSIG
into one status letter, but I was also fishing for some information
about EXPSIG. I was only vaguely aware that a signature could expire
_independently_ of the key used to do the signing. Also, according to
for the EXPSIG case 'Note, that this case is currently not implemented.'
Hmm, I guess these are so closely related that a single status letter
is OK, but I think I would prefer your phrasing; namely:
"X" for a good signature that has expired, or a good signature made with an
[Although that is still a bit cumbersome.]