[MERGE] Harmonize branch.conf with locations.conf and bazaar.conf

[Wouter van Heyst]

On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 01:05:26PM -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> 
> > So, I've seen the pattern:
> > 
> > 	config = bzrlib.config.BranchConfig(self)
> > and
> > 	config = bzrlib.config.BranchConfig(branch)
> > an awful lot.
> > It seems like it would be better to refactor these calls into:
> > 
> > config = branch.get_config()
> 
> Okay.
> 
> > Is this the test where you are testing that if the signature rules are
> > set in 'branch.conf' it doesn't get used?
> 
> When I referred to 'security-sensitive' options, I meant things that
> could cause security holes on the user's machine, like
> 'gpg-signing-command' and 'post-commit'.
> 
> I actually think it's a good idea to allow signing policy to be set by
> remote branches, so that e.g. bzr.dev can enable signing, causing
> commits against it or branches of it to be signed by default.

How about post_commit_to? I can imagine things going wrong if the email
sender plugin automatically activates if post_commit_to is set, sending
out email you didn't want. On the other hand, I have been asked why this
couldn't be set in .bzr/branch.conf so that all the development on that
piece of software could be overseen by watching one mailing list.

Wouter van Heyst