Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Future of monotone

[Markus Schiltknecht]

Hi,

Derek Scherger wrote:
> One reason for separating out the author from the signer is that, in the 
> event of a database rebuild, all certs will be re-signed by whoever does 
> the rebuild and the original author is lost. This has happened a few 
> times in the monotone history and while not a huge problem does leave 
> rebuild a little more lossy than it could be.

Yeah, and that argument gets even stronger if you take imports or 
pulling from foreign VCSes into account: you will have to pull in 
commits, tags and branches, and certainly can't recycle the "cert" from 
the source VCS (if here even is such a thing).

Having distinct signer and authors for tags and branches makes sense in 
those cases, IMO. Deferring that complexity to commit messages, which 
then have to be parsed by third party tools strikes me as a rather bad 
idea, taking flexibility from monotone.

Regards

Markus