"brian m. carlson" <[email protected]> writes: > trivial. I'm definitely not opposed if someone else is interested in > picking it up or writing it; I don't believe my outstanding patches > (which will likely show up on the list this weekend now that 2.23 is > out) would affect it in any way. > > I'll try to push up the work that I'm doing into my "transition-interop" > branch; it contains the work for literal hashing and a more significant > refactor, which folks are free to ignore.
Thanks for pushing the SHA-256 transition forward. > > The problem is somewhat ameliorated by the fact that for most projects, > there will be a mapping between SHA-1 and SHA-256, so it'll be possible > to look up between the two, but it can still be confusing if the "wrong" > one appears in commit messages, say.
