[RFC] cryptographic signatures - compared to monotone?

[Magnus Therning]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 07:50:15AM +0100, Jan Hudec wrote:
>On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 16:15:52 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
>> 
>> I've noticed that there are are many new exiting fetures proposed and
>> being discussed. Many new commands and options and the like.
>>
>> Perhaps the developers are already thinking about this, but I feel
>> that the design should take into account the cryptographic signatures
>> along with proposed new functionality.
>
>Alrady implemented. For quite some time IIRC.
>
>See http://wiki.bazaar.canonical.com/ConfiguringBzr for how to set it
>up.

How do I make a branch require signatures? (I.e. so that
"create_signatures=when-required" is triggered.)

/M

-- 
Magnus Therning                    (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4)
magnus at therning.org
http://therning.org/magnus

Software is not manufactured, it is something you write and publish.
Keep Europe free from software patents, we do not want censorship
by patent law on written works.

I have steadily endeavored to keep my mind free, so as to give up any
hypothesis, however much beloved -- and I cannot resist forming one
on every subject -- as soon as facts are shown to be opposed to it.
     -- Charles Darwin (1809-1882)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060213/b1fc057d/attachment.pgp