Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpg-interface: use more status letters

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 10:58:31 -0700

Michael J Gruber <[email-masked]> writes:

> Sorry, this got "lost in vacation". Before that, I was looking for an
> easy way to test expired signatures, but gpg1 and gpg2 behave somewhat
> differently in that respect (2 does not allow to create already expired
> signatures).
>
> Is there anything I should or could do now?

I dunno.  It's your itch.

You can say "I'll need more time to figure out the way to test what
I am not testing here, so do not merge it to 'next' yet".

You can also say "This is good enough for now, so go ahead and merge
it to 'next'; more detailed tests can be done as follow-up patches
if needed".

You can also say "Thinking about it again, there is no strong reason
why we need to differentiate EXPSIG and EXPKEYSIG, so don't do this
SQUASH and use my original one as-is".

I'd be happy with any of the above and there may be other ones I'd
be happy with that I haven't thought of ;-)