From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCDC71F5AE for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 16:10:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731892AbgFPQKH (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:10:07 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49992 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731524AbgFPQKF (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:10:05 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x733.google.com (mail-qk1-x733.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::733]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F3D1C061573 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x733.google.com with SMTP id l17so19635019qki.9 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:10:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=sK9gkWBfJgNSog+Ui7GlnRp8EHeoNDwx7ZEgf3RPEMw=; b=Rdufwc768TOIgHIC5Tqc84eZiBocnRpjpf4cvOZ2m6AYAeXakWALQ+UBbOOO8vFjWQ j5DM+AIlToTSjMkntHNQAuzzvKjlr/TPBciPD2sp/IHUsM7AxxolHtin/Ofg+XkUPJHJ fgnP4y/9AlbjkLLB42J9cc26xc3ZvC4m9eaUM= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to; bh=sK9gkWBfJgNSog+Ui7GlnRp8EHeoNDwx7ZEgf3RPEMw=; b=mCBVw/ooEeYbXqhKxIxtyeAYVuhD13qk067N8kCQYDvK7L2JE8IEbHGWANDQUf0Y13 FGjcpNRnmxBOZWiEJ61GYGCfOV+p6TRTEy1d3rWKTy5T7V6ukzldGsgDGVS5cnol7JiW l5HvjL1a645iF0XbmxJW7RXVADcpcFMOdZ/PPuELanJ2Untf0QLfselrdkdBOnQqJ/lD vsN0K9gsY8oaxoH8Pz40+xWsKlmpgH7ZyqN0ysEmycQB0DUbTVk8w0XotkGh+4s+Z5n3 XpzJq5PH864jdZEGpN5C7qSSmHUZrXfZPkqViXzOx8oYIuVPa5H4lVq8rld92Dponp/s MqDQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530s/gnkdGbPuRG+4hnsuKSedEDTD2iIbdJ0iLhwMDWbivnf7d/V CUhWYqVXekyERKItiwfAOt7+sg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxFWWfVBakuilAHlgYAlleOCSiJM6s3Tcr/GvVIsz0WHXZXIwZ6k5DTMDXmO8fCdbuOktAmdw== X-Received: by 2002:a37:64c2:: with SMTP id y185mr21807360qkb.186.1592323804363; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from i7.mricon.com (107-179-243-71.cpe.teksavvy.com. [107.179.243.71]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c6sm13628977qkg.93.2020.06.16.09.10.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:10:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by i7.mricon.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:10:01 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:10:01 -0400 From: Konstantin Ryabitsev To: Jeff King Cc: Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org, James Ramsay , Bryan Turner Subject: Re: Consensus on a new default branch name Message-ID: <20200616161001.fa5wa2br5ois2csr@chatter.i7.local> Mail-Followup-To: Jeff King , Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org, James Ramsay , Bryan Turner References: <20200615205722.GG71506@syl.local> <20200615212154.GA79696@syl.local> <20200616143107.GL666057@coredump.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200616143107.GL666057@coredump.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:31:07AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > My biggest concern here was trying to understand what could break. > Having read the patches from Johannes and thought about it a lot, I have > a pretty good handle on where Git itself cares about the name. And I > feel pretty confident that we can make the change in a way that won't > cause problems there (and in fact, I think some of the code will be > made more robust by relying on HEAD more appropriately). > > There's a more open question of what _else_ will break in the ecosystem. What if we work on making this configurable for now, but stick with the legacy name until we introduce breaking sha1 changes? Almost everything will need to retool for those anyway (and all documentation rewritten), so it is reasonable to bundle these changes to happen at the same time. -K