From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) (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 49CF817C217 for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 19:22:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.71 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726860134; cv=none; b=NmlHFfTjgWB9LaEyoOOO5l7E9l8yl9/kjd8wRlkO4kdATMjqaMMxcVk1F5WGGSwUz2c/QNytJChr54vN/74wKfphyoQHKDstxrE7b2a3IiLi4oZVdv1JY7jaOdCqYydYevI8OXTj/MRFzp7N+Ndc1oM4B+TMpQSoBeNIgAE+A9Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726860134; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ztwojbolMoMSLvFsAqirwNLxNpMyG2dMLAzncV0H78I=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=rb6EwZ5gIi1rQEZ6+3li5t2a0+EaNriunbUR2qq3rDGG+TRbmvpiyEgU4e9ce3Ru2ZRdvEXsqabTQ4aoR8ahtgf5XW1JHjCd9E7F7AwIdlvwGpnX86mYvuoDtdoJX5mD7yy+bZKVvfan/i2aYsAhH+gCsHjz50HFqKvtfhxfrnE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=tZX2en+z; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.71 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="tZX2en+z" Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 338F51DE7F; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 15:22:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gitster@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=ztwojbolMoMSLvFsAqirwNLxNpMyG2dMLAzncV 0H78I=; b=tZX2en+zzlBSJUSJUFMDPPitEJkzsYgLuUgVKZZU0nPKDBfaoaIeRq Qd10aKZNlnC7i9+A99j87wdxPgAx5wCIKoo0xdprKfo1rRrTPmYBoGcgo74+Eo2x e3//KWjslu2HEBPIejcieZV9hLvSCwog20EUOr8ag3qatem5OSBzQ= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AF731DE7E; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 15:22:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gitster@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.108.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F3941DE7D; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 15:22:11 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gitster@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Taylor Blau Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [TOPIC 05/11]: SHA 256 / Git 3.0 In-Reply-To: (Taylor Blau's message of "Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:19:33 -0400") References: Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 12:22:10 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A2B6BD00-7785-11EF-B926-9B0F950A682E-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Taylor Blau writes: > * Peff: I have a proposal for Git 3.0, maybe this has been discussed? > Can we get rid of some of the older protocols (dumb HTTP)? Please discuss these on list. Removal of http walker (both for fetching and pushing) you have my blessing ;-) > * Patrick: Lots of esoteric things, like show-branch, which apparently > nobody uses. You remove show-branch and you will stop seeing "What's cooking" ("git show-branch master $branch1 $branch2 ..." is used as a way to find the commits on each topic branch in flight, instead of running "git log master..$branch" N times). > * Elijah: not just removals, but changing defaults, etc. Yes. > * Emily: are we interested in non-backwards compatible changes, like > adding multi-Author fields to commits? > * Peff: I think that's a bad example, it can be done without breaking > compatibility, but it was decided to not to do it. You're welcome to > resurrect the discussion. Good. > * Taylor: the items on that document aren't a checkbox list of things > to do before Git 3.0, but isn't a "let's get all of these things > done and then we'll release Git 3.0". Yes. > * More that we'll all wake up one day, realize that we've done all > or enough of what would go into Git 3.0, then remove a bunch of > code, and ship it. Not exactly (see my recent comment on feature.git3 on the list---we need a good transition plan and early adopter opt-in mechanism).