Dnia 2014-09-20, o godz. 21:20:34 Rich Freeman <[email protected]> napisał(a):
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Gordon Pettey <[email protected]> wrote: > > You're following the wrong train down the wrong tracks. Git [0-9a-f]{40} is > > to CVS 1[.][1-9][0-9]+. You're arguing that CVS is more secure because its > > commits are sequential numbers. > > Ulrich is well-aware of that. His argument is that with cvs there is > no security whatsoever in the scm, and so there is more interest in > layering security on-top. With git there is more of a tendency to > rely on the less-than-robust commit signing system. > > We could always just keep full manifests in the tree and be no worse > off than with cvs. And we would be no better off than with CVS. We'd have huge repository with a lot of redundant space-eating data and the impossibility of sane merges or rebases. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
