Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation/technical: signature formats

From: Michael J Gruber <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 11:19:18 +0100

Jakub Narębski schrieb am 25.10.2014 um 10:30:
> W dniu 2014-10-22 21:02, Junio C Hamano pisze:
> 
>> A mergetag is not fundamentally a "signature" in the above sense,
>> though.  It is just a dump of the object content in a regular object
>> header field (hence indented by one SP), and its contents having PGP
>> SIGNATURE is merely a natural consequence of the object recorded
>> being a signed tag.  So the description of it in the same place as
>> description for signed tags and signed commits feels a little bit
>> out of place, but I do not think of a better place to describe it.
> 
> Does this mean that you can merge annotated (but not signed) tag,
> and have it (as description of merged branch) in 'mergetag' header?

We don't do that (so far).

In principle we could do that, of course. (But I really wish mergetag
would point to the tag object rather than embed it.)

But the point of the merge tag is to "bake into the commit object" some
verifiable information about the source of the merge, or rather about
some of its parents.

Just adding some non-verifiable, "come-and-go" information seems to be
more suited for notes.

Michael