From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2370F1F545 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:54:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232119AbjF2KyV (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2023 06:54:21 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59158 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232182AbjF2Kx1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2023 06:53:27 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 644 seconds by postgrey-1.37 at lindbergh.monkeyblade.net; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 03:53:19 PDT Received: from mail.zombino.com (c2.zombino.com [65.108.93.176]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9884835AA for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 03:53:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.168.4.114] (unknown [81.95.8.244]) by mail.zombino.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4AB33E98D; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:53:17 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <65148753-7071-d5d5-3b4e-bad020e6ab63@zombino.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 12:53:16 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0 Subject: Re: SHA256 support not experimental, or? Content-Language: en-US To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org References: <2f5de416-04ba-c23d-1e0b-83bb655829a7@zombino.com> From: Adam Majer In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 6/29/23 07:59, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Adam Majer writes: > >> Is sha256 still considered experimental or can it be assumed to be stable? > > I do not think we would officially label SHA-256 support as "stable" > until we have good interoperability with SHA-1 repositories, but the > expectation is that we will make reasonable effort to keep migration > path for the current SHA-256 repositories, even if it turns out that > its on-disk format need to be updated, to keep the end-user data safe. That could be a different definition of stable. But I'm satisfied that current sha256 repositories will not end up incompatible with some future version of git without migration path (talking about on-disk format). So maybe my question should be reworded to "is sha256 still considered early stage, for testing purposes only with possible data-loss or can it be relied on for actual long lived repositories?" > So while "no-longer-experimental" patch is probably a bit premature, > the warning in flashing red letters to caution against any use other > than testing may want to be toned down. Agreed. I think it should be clear that SHA256 and SHA1 repositories cannot share data at this point. The scary wording should be removed though, as currently it sounds like "data loss incoming and it's your fault" if one chooses sha256 - Adam