I’m not going to cryptographically sign my git commits, and you shouldn’t either.

I'm curious to hear what the Lemmy programming community thinks of this!

  • The author argues against signing Git commits, stating that it adds unnecessary complexity to systems.
  • The author believes that signing commits perpetuates an engineering culture of blindly adopting complex tools.
  • The consequences of signing Git commits are likely to be subtle and not as dramatic as some may believe.

Archive link: https://archive.ph/vjDeK

  • Mikina@programming.dev
    ·
    9 months ago

    If it has my username, on GitHub, you’re confident it’s my commit.

    Apparently, that's not true: https://dev.to/martiliones/how-i-got-linus-torvalds-in-my-contributors-on-github-3k4g

    However, it's a pretty old article - maybe it's already fixed? I'll have to try that.

    EDIT: It still works, and you can just use the github noreply address, which is ID+username@users.noreply.github.com . The commit gets linked to their profile, and is shown on their profile page, has their username and profile picture. I haven't figured out any difference between legit and impersonated commit so far, but maybe it's hidden somwhere in the repo administration.

    So, there you have it. That's what PGP signing is for.