On 2020/06/27 00:15:39, Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com> wrote: >... > So while I have no objection to keeping an index file, the real purpose of > the tool is served by keeping a permanent record of the affirmations, in a > form that is immediately accessible without looking at any other record. So > the signatory's name, timestamp, and the actual document which is being > affirmed are critically important to be preserved.
An index file duplicates information that is contained in svn. And svn is authoritative here, since (me) could just go and edit files directly. Whimsy is just a simple tool to figure out who needs to sign (but could/should allow others to do so, too), and give them a way to do the signing. >... > The term "annually" can be read in a few ways, which can be reflected in > different wordings on the web Just read "current year" and "prior year", and weave them together. You'll be able to synthesize "annual" in any fashion you like. Whether that is calendar, Board election cycle, or fiscal year. "svn info" gives you the last modification date, which is presumably the signing date. Presumed signing date. One suggestion: add a property, say "whimsy:signed" and insert the date. That could be modified later, manually, so just highlight any COI file (in the UI) that has more than one revision. A person could still manually construct a file with that property, too. The only *real* test is to ensure the file matches the COI policy that was in effect at the purported time of signing, and that the initial revision of the file's author (the svn:author property) matches the filename. Note that comparing the file means stripping the metadata from the end. I would suggest to make the file the policy-at-time, and use svn properties for the metadata (that is why they are there). I'd suggest creating a "validation" function that is simple today, but could be extended to more complex forms, such as suggested above. Cheers, -g
