Martin Fick <mf...@codeaurora.org> writes: > On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 04:53:36 pm Junio C Hamano > wrote: >> Martin Fick <mf...@codeaurora.org> writes: >> > One suggestion would be to change the repack code to >> > create pack filenames based on the sha1 of the >> > contents of the pack file instead of on the sha1 of >> > the objects in the packfile. ... >> > I am not 100% sure if the change in naming convention I >> > propose wouldn't cause any problems? But if others >> > agree it is a good idea, perhaps it is something a >> > beginner could do? >> >> I would not be surprised if that change breaks some other >> people's reimplementation. I know we do not validate >> the pack name with the hash of the contents in the >> current code, but at the same time I do remember that >> was one of the planned things to be done while I and >> Linus were working on the original pack design, which >> was the last task we did together before he retired from >> the maintainership of this project. > > Perhaps a config option? One that becomes standard for git > 2.0?
Anything new is too late for Git 2.0, as we do not want to hold the switching of push.default to "simple" too long. End of this year might be a bit too soon, but I want 2.0 to happen by the next spring. You can discuss, design the new naming and necessary transition plan for existing repositories, reach a concensus and declare the name switch in the future, and then schedule that for the next major version bump after 2.0 happens. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
