On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
I added this operation as a helpful shortcut; I'd like it to stay helpful (to me at least) by not wasting my time, and also being generally useful in a script where I can't have interactivity.
If the user wants to slow down, use --edit-key, or use --list-sigs before calling --lsign-key- we aren't forcing this down their throat by any means.
I see --populate and --edit-key as interactive options, I never meant for --lsign-key to be in that same boat. Does that make sense? I'd be happy to document this better.
Well, not really a big deal for me, anyway. I can easily change my copy of pacman-key every time it change :). I just think it is dangerous to sign without asking first, even if the user can use --list-{keys,sigs} to check the keyring before calling --edit-key. --edit-key is more bureaucratic (probably that's why gpg have --lsign-key as an command). But, as I said, it is not a deal breaker. -- A: Because it obfuscates the reading. Q: Why is top posting so bad? ------------------------------------------- Denis A. Altoe Falqueto Linux user #524555 -------------------------------------------