Jeff King wrote:

> The original patch is in next, so here's one on top. I just updated the
> description.


>              I was tempted to explicitly say something like "this is
> opaque and meaningless to you, don't rely on it", but I don't know that
> there is any need.
> On top of jk/name-pack-after-byte-representations, naturally.

I think there is --- if someone starts caring about the SHA-1 used,
they won't be able to act on old packfiles that were created before
this change.  How about something like the following instead?

-- >8 --
From: Jeff King <>
Subject: pack-objects doc: treat output filename as opaque

After 1190a1a (pack-objects: name pack files after trailer hash,
2013-12-05), the SHA-1 used to determine the filename is calculated
differently.  Update the documentation to not guarantee anything more
than that the SHA-1 depends on the pack content somehow.

Hopefully this will discourage readers from depending on the old or
the new calculation.

Reported-by: Michael Haggerty <>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <>
 Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt 
index d94edcd..cdab9ed 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt
@@ -51,8 +51,7 @@ base-name::
        <base-name> to determine the name of the created file.
        When this option is used, the two files are written in
        <base-name>-<SHA-1>.{pack,idx} files.  <SHA-1> is a hash
-       of the sorted object names to make the resulting filename
-       based on the pack content, and written to the standard
+       based on the pack content and is written to the standard
        output of the command.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to