From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0FD51F597 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 21:32:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731337AbeGYWq1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2018 18:46:27 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f65.google.com ([209.85.221.65]:40969 "EHLO mail-wr1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731243AbeGYWq1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2018 18:46:27 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f65.google.com with SMTP id j5-v6so8687620wrr.8 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:32:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=clV/6O+fmyQrQFSbL7ar8wijR2vSGIi2J78rmveCwC4=; b=qIO9M7voKphZF9saFl+6llFhgJpYu2Oe4ZFphtC4fsrxHP/EnhAqT6lsy0II7rDwf4 58MB0KpFTYKOQTautiDNoBtB4jg3TokUbVNF3h+ZKKybvJ5Uoli43WHxex8r6NwP7J9d XmNj/OcqThoDWF9o9hR3YX7CY4i6grBZszhMc22hpRV3SDkP80ngrRc0kikvMbiaw5RS G88CsGoyeqhwBTNbyEoLITO2Pj7z1Z7Bdp3jUg1o3kt2uJtvA0D1se7RUZg1nKZ6bdN5 WrD4FIdsDuvXrk7tCgNK7LgOjszzfP5W0SHXmt2SFi9U6fAHZ/RvOM+SAO/GBCut5h18 PLAQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=clV/6O+fmyQrQFSbL7ar8wijR2vSGIi2J78rmveCwC4=; b=CrGYO+TFz7kCba0If5AXZHhPhVWhuItl8mTGkB23o3oUsZGHgTIZ9/NlmsbAM5Zltd L2n8zwHtO7nfMqE8t2w/ZhmYvKWsvxnM4w7Q1BbmsGbcDSJNQx1g5yZ7ucepNql+faEH 2lZ6vkS/nYNKRDnqwLKgYX5kwowMC5CR0CcHTlhdfBN+bJ/KVbIFkx42hMS7We587cVz Tz3lByUprAxVQQwhezGmya+xQ/0MkOVK2p0HuumEsO8YSIsKgaWOpfjice0tjF0InDDG KR9XqFZXeSbp3rNDxcB0pAS2EoBYx6jPUpiWZuLz122kG1VsVHJf+to0fUERV/yI+zNo EhCg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlG51lNSfehVp6q3BBkyL/CIIYZ2mCPwUxZQ9AxkJaPIt3KrnW6T lmjg/KEmaC+QqLpnCs2rPbU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpe7wHispmAVispTSdVHjFNzsvrQhysBPR63JlFwXFlpUnyFu58nHln1FVC6qyTr5eexKzjUlg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:494c:: with SMTP id r12-v6mr15693449wrs.66.1532554371939; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:32:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (112.68.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.68.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x14-v6sm13694331wrv.21.2018.07.25.14.32.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:32:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Nieder Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , git@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Edward Thomson , "brian m . carlson" , Johannes Schindelin , demerphq , Adam Langley , keccak@noekeon.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc hash-function-transition: pick SHA-256 as NewHash References: <20180725083024.16131-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20180725083024.16131-3-avarab@gmail.com> <20180725172537.GA176329@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:32:50 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20180725172537.GA176329@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> (Jonathan Nieder's message of "Wed, 25 Jul 2018 10:25:37 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Nieder writes: > Regardless of how we spell it in prose, I think `sha256` as an > identifier in configuration is the spelling people will expect. For > example, gpg ("gpg --version") calls it SHA256. OK. > For what it's worth, I would be in favor of modifying the section > more heavily. For example: > ... > Changes: > > - retitled since the hash function has already been selected > - added some notes about sha1dc > - when discussing wide implementation availability, mentioned > CommonCrypto too, as an example of a non-OpenSSL library that the > libgit2 authors care about > - named which function is chosen > > We could put the runners up in the "alternatives considered" section, > but I don't think there's much to say about them here so I wouldn't. All interesting ideas and good suggestions. I'll leave 2/2 in the mail archive and take only 1/2 for now. I'd expect the final version, not too soon after mulling over the suggestions raised here, but not in too distant future to prevent us from forgetting ;-) Thanks.