Re: [PATCH 0/7] gpg-interface cleanups

[Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>]

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 16.06.2016 20:20:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
>> This started off with Michael's patch to sign_buffer, which is at the
>> tip, and then me trying to address the possible deadlocks there and in
>> verify_signed_buffer. While I was in the area, I took the opportunity to
>> do a few cleanups.
>>
>> It's unclear to me whether the deadlocks are possible in practice; see
>> patch 5 for discussion.
> 
> I do recall thinking about the verification side and coming up with
> the same conclusion as yours when we queued that code (i.e. they
> need to read the whole thing before checking).
> 
>> My guess is probably not, but the amount of code
>> to support doing it right is not all that much. But if we don't like it,
>> we can drop 4-6.
> 
> Let's keep all of them; they all looked reasonable.
> 
>> Patch 7 is still authored by Michael, but has been massaged greatly by
>> me. I'll comment more directly on the changes there.
>>
>>   [1/7]: gpg-interface: use child_process.args
>>   [2/7]: verify_signed_buffer: drop pbuf variable
>>   [3/7]: verify_signed_buffer: use tempfile object
>>   [4/7]: run-command: add pipe_command helper
>>   [5/7]: verify_signed_buffer: use pipe_command
>>   [6/7]: sign_buffer: use pipe_command
>>   [7/7]: gpg-interface: check gpg signature creation status
> 
> Thanks.

Thanks, too. I approve of and enjoyed all of Jeff's massaging.

(With tests, I'm always unsure whether to follow surrounding style or
the style guide; I did the former, Jeff improved the config handling by
doing the latter.)

Michael