Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash function

2017-03-05 Thread brian m. carlson
On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 01:45:46PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > brian m. carlson writes ("Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash > function"): > > Instead, I was referring to areas like the notes code. It has extensive > > use of the last byte as a type of lookup table key. It's very

Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash function

2017-03-05 Thread Ian Jackson
brian m. carlson writes ("Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash function"): > Instead, I was referring to areas like the notes code. It has extensive > use of the last byte as a type of lookup table key. It's very dependent > on having exactly one hash, since it will always want to

Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash function

2017-03-04 Thread brian m. carlson
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 06:13:27PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > brian m. carlson writes ("Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash > function"): > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 01:00:01PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > Objects of one hash may refer to objects named by a different hash > > >

Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash function

2017-03-02 Thread Ian Jackson
brian m. carlson writes ("Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash function"): > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 01:00:01PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Objects of one hash may refer to objects named by a different hash > > function to their own. Preference rules arrange that normally, new > >

Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash function

2017-02-28 Thread brian m. carlson
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 01:00:01PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > I said I was working on a transition plan. Here it is. This is > obviously a draft for review, and I have no official status in the git > project. But I have extensive experience of protocol compatibility > engineering, and I hope

Re: Transition plan for git to move to a new hash function

2017-02-27 Thread Tony Finch
Ian Jackson wrote: A few questions and one or two suggestions... > TEXTUAL SYNTAX > == > > We also reserve the following syntax for private experiments: > E[A-Z]+[0-9a-z]+ > We declare that public releases of git will never accept such > object