On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 11:32:06PM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote: > * David Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-20 13:37 -0500]: > > Seriously, think about it: > > > > non-revocable sig 1-Jan-2000 > > expiring sig 2-Jan-2000 (expires 10-Jan-2000). > > > > Now, say it's January 3rd. According to what you want, the signature > > that gets used is the 2-Jan-2000. Then, suddenly, on 10-Jan-2000, > > when that signature expires, the 1-Jan-2000 signature is used. > > > > End result: there is always a signature. > > > > According to what actually happens, the signature that is used is > > 1-Jan-2000. > > > > End result: there is always a signature. > > > > I suggest that if it bothers you all that much, you pretend that it's > > doing what you want. It's not like there is a way to tell the > > difference. > > What about different Levels (sig1..sig3) of signatures? If the first > one is sig3 and the second one sig1 and min-cert-level>1 there would > be a difference.
Yes, this is exactly why I don't want to do what Jason suggested. That would imply allowing a sig1 (which is ignored) to override a non-revocable signature, implicitly "revoking" it. David _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users