Subject: Patch

From: Christopher Rodriguez <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 10:09:40 -0500

Here's a quick patch I threw together for the documentation.

-- 
Christopher Rodriguez

From 632435ee888e9c5fc6b1b65811d43e7343e7e172 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Christopher Rodriguez <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 10:00:23 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Modified '.guix-authorizations' section to clearly define
 version field.

---
 doc/guix.texi | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi
index 28eaf8338c..a071754c54 100644
--- a/doc/guix.texi
+++ b/doc/guix.texi
@@ -5421,7 +5421,7 @@ for Computer Scientists}} for a great overview.}  The
 ;; Example '.guix-authorizations' file.
 
 (authorizations
- (version 0)               ;current file format version
+ (version 0)                       ;current API version
 
  (("AD17 A21E F8AE D8F1 CC02  DBD9 F8AE D8F1 765C 61E3"
    (name "alice"))
@@ -5432,7 +5432,9 @@ for Computer Scientists}} for a great overview.}  The
 @end lisp
 
 Each fingerprint is followed by optional key/value pairs, as in the
-example above.  Currently these key/value pairs are ignored.
+example above.  Currently these key/value pairs are ignored, but this
+may change in the future. The @code{version} field specifies the version
+of the @code{authorizations} API the file was written for.
 
 This authentication rule creates a chicken-and-egg issue: how do we
 authenticate the first commit?  Related to that: how do we deal with
-- 
2.34.0