From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from complex.crustytoothpaste.net (complex.crustytoothpaste.net [172.105.7.114]) (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 D49C4229B2A for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2025 23:07:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=172.105.7.114 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759273673; cv=none; b=RigZkagjKDsmtRlNqPida45TZ3Qtr3YHeVm1gVuLi37P9YeXEISbVJJLWbmOR58R41iEkMif151HPOu9qBG8RQ1io/Xc146ZIwJKXxRJ0oC/BOTqNc2R8FXF1SZpaD/2sRfB3g3Vdp1ordrpvZEggWnfB7LXtyJk84s1vEzFJYw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759273673; c=relaxed/simple; bh=T+AoZJan2eo47iOAO9ED1kvngB/oSq9WdjOhhiga8aM=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition; b=hP48a4GE3mxSqwtkaW8jKvgT9P3YPMy73Jl4ZiS483tUsYQIm7Fmu9b01yaYuDjayM0kYECL9OLX93BMrZEFnUl3dPKYJyABLQ44e5LCXqVXrM8pFID/CvtOBXfUfXMagJCvM49nbckdW+pu5nhYH3zkT3+kGAguai6Dvqw55ug= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=crustytoothpaste.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=crustytoothpaste.net; dkim=pass (3072-bit key) header.d=crustytoothpaste.net header.i=@crustytoothpaste.net header.b=h+pyw631; arc=none smtp.client-ip=172.105.7.114 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=crustytoothpaste.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=crustytoothpaste.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (3072-bit key) header.d=crustytoothpaste.net header.i=@crustytoothpaste.net header.b="h+pyw631" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=crustytoothpaste.net; s=default; t=1759273664; bh=T+AoZJan2eo47iOAO9ED1kvngB/oSq9WdjOhhiga8aM=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:From: Reply-To:Subject:Date:To:CC:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Disposition; b=h+pyw631BH6czvI4Fk1dFYFR4B0txK541CsggLhiZ87HKet81ybPyD40XeOskLpwB eYj4jYk9VubdXRrXWcKMJVYa2LhyZmA7oh93zpdyXwURopTJ/HPnUv+qyrvh8jFKU2 vm4Wwg4ALIPX0WqDZlrjvahX1xBxAKAkDBYMWZlHJaXBmQq/VilRkPkrni6M/zNgSe L7aAQA4T6g9sD7njLHVLUuVqFduymm8SKOZqQfSP3HXyUE/eyynTgHSwgg8J5IXIdb 7agWEgVcFIoDkWjBZUeUnwdTtAIFrPOJG3+Mlpjx7+gb7FCvEEA26BBkDX8/GOLTWM Sw/lpXtT2OSJWrWyJkR7Vd4444ifF0+/XJN8Ow95OLhRR1rUPLT3utaIht+RwEmUhO 63SDXOl9JMAbO2CVoytSwH/JT70+Z7vcG0MGggvHS672ZPKV7mglTtEkrYNaO8ZapJ vgsdSMtLYL+Od4zhy5NClAyvWoH1Qot/plJSZMhQulj53rqab/g Received: from fruit.crustytoothpaste.net (unknown [IPv6:2607:f2c0:f00f:f901:3c0c:de88:5b0d:9364]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by complex.crustytoothpaste.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4E38020113 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2025 23:07:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 23:07:42 +0000 From: "brian m. carlson" To: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: When should we release Git 3.0? Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: "brian m. carlson" , git@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nplUULpJmJrTBpU4" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.13 (2024-03-09) --nplUULpJmJrTBpU4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There's been discussion at the Contributor Summit about when we should release Git 3.0. The original plan that was discussed was to release in about a year, which is about 4 releases away. Almost all of the functionality that we had wanted in Git 3.0 has been implemented. The two major things we may want to consider as blockers for Git 3.0 are the following: * The SHA-256 interoperability work is not done yet. My estimate of this work is 200=E2=80=93400 patches, of which about 100 are done. If the original schedule is maintained, this would require writing up to 75 patches and sending in 100 patches per cycle, which is unrealistic without additional contributors. * Some forges and other projects do not yet have full SHA-256 support. It's my understanding that all of the major forges are undertaking or have undertaken this work and are at various levels of completion, but it's not clear that other projects have appropriate support. We may also wish to stick to a stricter timeframe for this release regardless and make four releases from now or the next release a year away Git 3.0 regardless of whether those items above are completed. Discussions at the Contributor Summit did mention the advantage of having a hard deadline would be that it would make projects and forges spend the time to implement SHA-256 support if they're lacking it. I personally do not want the interoperability work to be a blocker. I haven't really heard other commitments of contributors who want to work on it and I don't really want to have to run full tilt trying to get it out. However, some other people may feel differently, in which I case I encourage their participation in the project. What do others think about this? --=20 brian m. carlson (they/them) Toronto, Ontario, CA --nplUULpJmJrTBpU4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.4.8 (GNU/Linux) iHUEABYKAB0WIQQILOaKnbxl+4PRw5F8DEliiIeigQUCaNxivgAKCRB8DEliiIei gVOQAP45MMgtqUrHB1zVo8fVmKhZxGHuX+eKfiLE6r0aLbc7AwD+IXaFuSqmOmfw mETjm9JxF3j0dVw7YwQk/HocDlDyZAE= =dCV+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nplUULpJmJrTBpU4--