mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: "Martin Ågren" <>
To: Junio C Hamano <>
Cc: "brian m. carlson" <>,
	Git Mailing List <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: mark `--object-format=sha256` as experimental
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2020 00:15:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 at 22:50, Junio C Hamano <> wrote:
> Martin Ågren <> writes:
> >> I'm fine with marking the functionality experimental for a few releases,
> >> since it is possible we have bugs people haven't found, and adding a
> >> note about interoperability after that point, since I think that's a
> >> fair and valuable issue.  I think if we go a few releases without any
> >> major issues, we can change this to the following:
> >>
> >>   Note that a SHA-256 repository cannot yet share work with "regular"
> >>   SHA-1 repositories.  Many tools do not yet understand SHA-256
> >>   repositories, so users may wish to take this into account when
> >>   creating new repositories.
> >
> > With respect, I think that's too aggressive. By that time, we may
> > conclude that, e.g., the "v2 pack indices with SHA-256" file handling is
> > robust. But I'd be surprised if using `git init --object-format=sha256`
> > in June 2021 won't cause *some* extra work for users or ourselves
> > further down the line compared to using a regular SHA-1 `git init`.
> > Pushing to a SHA-1 hosting service will become *possible* at some point,
> > but maybe it won't be *efficient enough to be practical in the real
> > world* until some time after that.
> IOW, you question "if we go a few releases without any major issues"
> part?  I tend to agree that for a large change like this, a few
> releases may not be sufficiently long time for a feature that is
> marked as experimental in big flashing red letters to get exercised
> enough to get major issues noticed.

Yeah, thanks for summarizing what I failed to express using so many

I'm fully open to the idea that some people want to leave SHA-1 behind
and that they can do it today, in some "local" sense. If those people
are fully aware that they are guinea pigs, it might actually be ok for
us to subject them to a few rounds of "oops, Git v2.32.0 produces data
that v2.34.0 and later will barf on". Or at least it would be on our
table whether we wanted to be that cavalier.

Once SHA-256 repos as such are no longer experimental, I fear that we
can only buy ourselves that leeway by introducing fiftyeleven different
config flags for "please produce auxiliary files X even if you don't
actually use them", "please do use X, and I'm fully expecting to trip on
them if you decide to tweak them in backwards-incompatible ways", and so
on. The alternative to buying such leeway might be to establish, pretty
early on, a respectable set of things we support "for compatibility

> > Now would probably be a good time to update the hash transition
> > documents, first of all to tick off what we've already done, and second,
> > to reassess the rest.
> Yes, it is a good idea to stop and see where in the overall large
> picture we currently are.


  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-07 22:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-06 20:23 [PATCH] Documentation: mark `--object-format=sha256` as experimental Martin Ågren
2020-08-06 23:08 ` brian m. carlson
2020-08-07 14:08   ` Martin Ågren
2020-08-07 20:50     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-07 22:15       ` Martin Ågren [this message]
2020-08-13 20:34         ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-14  0:51           ` brian m. carlson
2020-08-16 10:01             ` [PATCH v2] " Martin Ågren

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).