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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 0241B1F642 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:48:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=bhNxwxB6; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231438AbjBAMsd (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2023 07:48:33 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58804 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229722AbjBAMsb (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2023 07:48:31 -0500 Received: from mail-qk1-x735.google.com (mail-qk1-x735.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::735]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F2C04480 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 04:48:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x735.google.com with SMTP id t9so7920869qkm.2 for ; Wed, 01 Feb 2023 04:48:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=zvBlcM1jLRCbdawNf9e0KBSyHBNkh6NRSQtXf04AnVY=; b=bhNxwxB65Wqgr8xQebJnI6Ckb4Oqh6lYPZ99FMIA/xj7V6+gMtUuMF5PqcPBmIRMBe t98tRxEJm018OMBDRswQoTN6Txt8jLclglkWTCBi3ffgGbDiwXjkHWkM8SexHYxRjbQY vGYzZXNWos274A9y1PQf1n3sBMeJBT8E1yPphLmsC7qxcBwBlmu0af0V42c8fVGRr6wP m3kKjiYy2ylLUMx0MZ94/38L7o9+huZHjG32eiWPZLCvhGfj3iWlsRWkBOR+UH3MxOv6 SiOCplxqM0sYtD5JzIx5g5oVQTGq/H3gEvX0SciCPxbkQhNjQ8NnbaA4dWUYaYlBU7jy OrUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=zvBlcM1jLRCbdawNf9e0KBSyHBNkh6NRSQtXf04AnVY=; b=FkbD9YRKqdc1tWBpddhuSqM3U0ux+sURvUkdLuV5/yV5YnWpJNwv4/UmzLlemy1iuQ WH4w3Lz5kWXEPPMpJxtLWV3+57NSr8XiWXeWrRv83BSX801A1J9sVsYaI+/53iV04piw DNMIStJ15vJT9lnPwqPNHEZdT9pFpbfJvOB87CKsKdRV7rZaBGlkXXpMQWd/SwQIHFlT yGfUG7Dx+J5ApFKL7FhOgTIvUGcNfFHOHAUaFSwgRfaZXDWYNoQ1D6b7vLvX29VPrpyY gPwbVzJZu+zeOQRJT+vAuGEy1ZviFm9Rj2XDDnFhfENhxwWkiMlcSw2NKQE9UQuTTuIX 4wkg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKW5uocU77KNDmCP5UY8JYWLJken/WanoOCxqJiqLbCox0l/bmsq GSyAd3O24z8GooRXOTMx2DUS80yhP1CHYcjIBCo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8CuQ1co2Yn/TCvFDOaeFJED1kRBQHconXYi+IoHNPj2A3gcRKtKXSC8qGUF+nqBRvxqosyiHfU4Cq8TSaRLD0= X-Received: by 2002:a37:c85:0:b0:71a:6288:9ea7 with SMTP id 127-20020a370c85000000b0071a62889ea7mr212931qkm.221.1675255708608; Wed, 01 Feb 2023 04:48:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230131150555.ewiwsbczwep6ltbi@meerkat.local> <230201.86pmatr9mj.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> <20230201122152.GJ19419@kitsune.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20230201122152.GJ19419@kitsune.suse.cz> From: demerphq Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 13:48:17 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Stability of git-archive, breaking (?) the Github universe, and a possible solution To: =?UTF-8?Q?Michal_Such=C3=A1nek?= Cc: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= , "brian m. carlson" , Konstantin Ryabitsev , Eli Schwartz , Git List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, 20:21 Michal Such=C3=A1nek, wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 12:34:06PM +0100, demerphq wrote: > > Why does it have to be gzip? It is not that hard to come up with a > historical reasons? Currently git doesn't advertise that archive creation is stable right[1]? So I wrote that with the assumption that this new compression would only be used when making a new archive with a hypothetical new '--stable' option. So historical reasons don't come up. Or was there some other form of history that you meant? I'm just trying to point out here that stable compression is doable and doesn't need to be as complex as specifying a stable gzip format. I am not even saying git should just do this, just that it /could/ if it decided that stability was important, and that doing so wouldn't involve the complexity that Avar was implying would be needed. Simple compression like LZ variants are pretty straightforward to implement, achieve pretty good compression and can run pretty fast. Yves [1] if it did the issue kicking off this thread would not have happened as there would be a test that would have noticed the change.