3 ms·

> "Others who look at those commits would still see the correct person's name," They would see the name which was written into the commit; assuming that's "the

> "Others who look at those commits would still see the correct person's name," They would see the name which was written into the commit; assuming that's "the correct person" is the same mistake. Associating to the GitHub verified email account is incorrect in the same fashion, but going the other way. They're both only text saying "Linus Torvalds", in the absence of signing, neither is more or less authoritative than the other. Connecting it to a random profile looks wrong, but trying to correct it to the 'right' profile lends it an air of legitimacy it shouldn't have. Papering over that is like teaching people to click through warning messages, or that HTTP is fine because the site shows the right looking text.

Dylan16807 5y ago
> Papering over that is like teaching people to click through warning messages, or that HTTP is fine because the site shows the right looking text. That's a completely separate problem, and whether it is papered over is completely independent of this problem. With this problem, even if you already verified the repo, even if there are signatures, it still shows the wrong profile. > Connecting it to a random profile looks wrong, but trying to correct it to the 'right' profile lends it an air of legitimacy it shouldn't have. Displaying nothing is not "trying to correct it to the 'right' profile"