From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from secure.elehost.com (secure.elehost.com [185.209.179.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 586A055D86B for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2026 15:46:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.209.179.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788882401; cv=none; b=MP0wE0npEuXqAOduLjKXbtScp0iQm7Nh50vYDn71xjMs/zYBZtsd5zdoNwvkiucNLxj94kjUgv8HYV7Uvcy4cHgKEliPj49oykjRCgL9Cn3aW5wAlUcVRz/RjvhUgDHV+IAK8TkZTjzDMwN8kS2GQ7Ah+J+E6eyCicRQeROSGpU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788882401; c=relaxed/simple; bh=j5LWScRjw1x8CC3PJTsi/WqMLwni9fvkFJqqj2BWG5M=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VDYchMAll1L1wVEYpdF+vl6PXLxLeKm/sj2QdQnrvAE+sdFgYNBuBHCUAjQfzjFtIbT9rjMMcPraq9vKNyK4FKYQCH6WV4vGXdFFB9GN6odl2EVItpZNfbxP1hZPIx9LIiL8Wt30TRcsO+7anwiZbsZ/dWYGYcYDFWRM+Y1UI2Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=nexbridge.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nexbridge.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.209.179.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=nexbridge.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nexbridge.com X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at secure.elehost.com Received: from Mazikeen (pool-99-255-187-253.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.255.187.253]) (authenticated bits=0) by secure.elehost.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-22ubuntu3) with ESMTPSA id 688FkMGg1653475 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 8 Sep 2026 15:46:22 GMT Reply-To: From: To: "'brian m. carlson'" , "'Junio C Hamano'" Cc: References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: What will come after Git 2.56? Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 11:46:16 -0400 Organization: Nexbridge Inc. Message-ID: <010801dd3fa9$3277ae30$97670a90$@nexbridge.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQJp64hHX77XhPwv59ItOxMkZ3lG/gHEpP6HtZ1Vt0A= Content-Language: en-ca X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 260907-4, 9/7/2026), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean On September 6, 2026 2:15 PM, brian m. carlson wrote: >On 2026-09-06 at 07:03:20, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> http://tinyurl.com/gitcal tells us that the current development cycle >> for Git 2.56 will conclude around the end of this month. As our >> typical development cycle lasts between 8 and 12 weeks, we will have >> exactly one more cycle after that before the end of the year. >> >> Now, the question is what that release should be called. A few >> thoughts. >> >> (1) Git 3.0: it is tempting to conclude the year with a big >> version bump. Splash! >> >> (2) Git 2.99: by leaving no more room until 3.0, we will >> conclude the year with a version that is still in the 2.X >> series, but will hopefully force us to seriously prepare for >> a big version bump with the first release of the year 2027. >> >> (3) Git 2.98 (or 2.97): we admit that we are not ready for even >> (2) and chicken out, leaving us breathing room for a few >> more preparatory releases before the big one. >> >> (4) Git 2.57: doing business as usual. >> >> Needless to say, this is not a popularity contest, nor is it even a >> democracy. Regardless, we should review what we have in the >> 'BreakingChanges' document and ask ourselves how ready we are. > >There are a few remaining things I think we should consider in regards = to this: > >* forge support for SHA-256 on the remaining major forges (I have an > update to provide about this at Git Merge); >* any updates on libgit2 and its support for SHA-256 and reftable; and >* the lowercase-only object IDs series, which I will be sending out a > re-roll for today or tomorrow and which is a breaking change that we > may want to soak for a release or two. > >I think anyone else who is not already extremely far along on SHA-256 = (and >reftable, for software working with local repositories) is likely not = worth considering. >JGit and Gitoxide were both informed that >SHA-256 was coming in Git 3.0 at least a year ago, for instance. (I = know because I >did the informing.) > >Similarly, I am not aware of anyone who is seriously undertaking Rust = support for >platforms that do not already support it, so I don't think that should = be a blocker, >either. Actually, I may have some news on that score. While it is unlikely to = make 3.0, it could be soon after. Unfortunately, all info is NDA, so I cannot really = publicise it at this point. I remain very hopeful. >So my gut reaction would be that maybe 3 is the best choice. 2.97 = might be nice, or >we could be more careful and go with 2.95 and then skip ahead to 3.0 = whenever >we're ready. Randall