Re: [RFC/PATCH] define the way new representation types are encoded in the pack

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Because all blobs in this tree object must be in a fixed order, and
they won't likely have meaningful names nor permission, should
CAT_TREE payload is a SHA-1 sequence of all blobs (or cat-trees if we
want nested trees) instead? IOW the tree is integrated into cat-tree
object, not as a separate tree object.

I have no problem with that (I am not worried about minor details of the
actual implementation of cat-tree yet).

Side note. It should be renamed "split-object" or something if we go the
route you suggest, as "tree"-ness of the actual representation is not
essential.