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=-4.0 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 3C0321F66E for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 17:33:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728590AbgHNRdN (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2020 13:33:13 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:54166 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726270AbgHNRdL (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2020 13:33:11 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5CCF7F1E4; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 13:33:08 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=MQEW5+M9Y0vX URezOBcJsPsHPso=; b=ErWLOqpbLTzj7pIh/DwfDY3GnQ4DcfnoqM0bf9XhEFTe muUj4NqdKd48AxAwwmzOoYZbllKN6fBwFsOd7hvp3U6Gyo42jyVqg3GzIP35rxgc nel1Oog27oqKIhi2E/KsCpi+J8x5bwaqlWVBDXPQiilvXqQPzhcWC/kTi3+w9Uc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=EgmdcI uWbBangTFMcwQlDV/+k/HhMNlhdb5ph+ALpqYkuvSag+VT8wSUaMaRMjlAFaxF6R WGD6T6RZEztn+FEoQn1qgEi9qBJFiubFZlHXG9P5bCbDRwemgzNKL1cKtpvdO6Uz ctxieIL4SIuWKMqCufgLMECudbQJHBo5P+jaA= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81AE07F1E3; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 13:33:08 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.231.104.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 41CED7F1E1; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 13:33:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Martin =?utf-8?Q?=C3=85gren?= Cc: "brian m. carlson" , git@vger.kernel.org, Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] protocol-capabilities.txt: clarify "allow-x-sha1-in-want" re SHA-256 References: <20200813224901.2652387-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <13798dfb121c9631e9d811f5f74f9a78c1fcfdf9.1597406877.git.martin.agren@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 10:33:06 -0700 In-Reply-To: <13798dfb121c9631e9d811f5f74f9a78c1fcfdf9.1597406877.git.martin.agren@gmail.com> ("Martin =?utf-8?Q?=C3=85gren=22's?= message of "Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:21:44 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 373251D0-DE54-11EA-A667-01D9BED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Martin =C3=85gren writes: > Two of our extensions contain "sha1" in their names, but that's > historical. The "want"s will take object names that are not necessarily > SHA-1s. Make this clear, but also make it clear how there's still just > one correct hash algo: These extensions don't somehow make the "want"s > take object names derived using *any* hash algorithm. > > Signed-off-by: Martin =C3=85gren > --- > Documentation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt | 11 +++++++---- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt b/Docume= ntation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt > index 36ccd14f97..47f1b30090 100644 > --- a/Documentation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt > +++ b/Documentation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt > @@ -324,15 +324,18 @@ allow-tip-sha1-in-want > ---------------------- > =20 > If the upload-pack server advertises this capability, fetch-pack may > -send "want" lines with SHA-1s that exist at the server but are not > -advertised by upload-pack. > +send "want" lines with object names that exist at the server but are n= ot > +advertised by upload-pack. (Note that the name of the capability > +contains "sha1", but that it's more general than that: in SHA-1 > +repositories, the "want" lines provide SHA-1 values, but in SHA-256 > +repositories, they provide SHA-256 values.) I think we should have either a new sha256 capability or a more generic hash-algo capability whose value can be set to sha256. Neither the connection initiators or the acceptors should talk in sha256 until both ends agreed to do so. =20 I do not think of any other way to make sure hosting sites to serve projects that migrate at different pace. Per project, you might be able to have a flag day. You cannot have a flag day that spans the world.