From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce SHA1_FILE_DIRECTORIES Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 09:38:46 -0700 Message-ID: <7vll6oz755.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vmzr8apxc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <2637.10.10.10.24.1115425225.squirrel@linux1> <7vis1vc27f.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <2721.10.10.10.24.1115425962.squirrel@linux1> <7vbr7nbl89.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vacn6ak7r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <427F6693.2080707@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Sean , Linus Torvalds , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 09 19:18:47 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DVBAN-0004J5-7i for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 09 May 2005 18:31:55 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261445AbVEIQiu (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2005 12:38:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261447AbVEIQiu (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2005 12:38:50 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao09.cox.net ([68.230.241.30]:53709 "EHLO fed1rmmtao09.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261445AbVEIQis (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2005 12:38:48 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.60.172]) by fed1rmmtao09.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050509163847.VODS7275.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Mon, 9 May 2005 12:38:47 -0400 To: "H. Peter Anvin" In-Reply-To: <427F6693.2080707@zytor.com> (H. Peter Anvin's message of "Mon, 09 May 2005 06:33:07 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "HPA" == H Peter Anvin writes: HPA> Naming the environment variables SHA1_FILE_ is almost HPA> certainly wrong; a much more logical name would be HPA> GIT_. It'd also be much less likely to cause conflicts. Exactly my feeling from the beginning. But you have to realize that you are suggesting to change the SHA1_FILE_DIRECTORY that was there from almost the beginning as well. I know the code change required for the rename is minimum, but there are users involved. My feeling is that we should contain the damage by changing the definition of DB_ENVIRONMENT in cache.h sooner rather than later, but I do not think this is the week to do it.