Hi Leo, Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 08:47:54PM -0400, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: >> I'm not sure how that'd work, since Git only allows a single PGP >> signature per commit, as far as I can tell. When you rewrite the >> history (by using rebase, say), the existing signatures of the rewritten >> (rebased) commits are replaced with new ones generated from your key. > > Is it so bad to re-sign commits on feature branches that we should lose > the easy-to-read history of rebased branches? It's no the end of the world, but if it's avoidable, it should be, in my opinion. A bigger problem with rebasing is that it means a single person can push changes to the rebased branch. As discussed previously in this thread, a good policy would be to suggest avoid *both* rebases and merges during a feature branch development. This way we avoid both problems, and if the branch is short lived, it should be bearable that is isn't synced with master for its short lifetime. -- Thanks, Maxim
