Re: [RFC PATCH] repack: rewrite the shell script in C.

Martin Fick [off-list ref] writes:

On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 04:53:36 pm Junio C Hamano 
wrote:

quoted

Martin Fick [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

One suggestion would be to change the repack code to
create pack filenames based on the sha1 of the
contents of the pack file instead of on the sha1 of
the objects in the packfile. ...
I am not 100% sure if the change in naming convention I
propose wouldn't cause any problems?  But if others
agree it is a good idea, perhaps it is something a
beginner could do?

I would not be surprised if that change breaks some other
people's reimplementation.  I know we do not validate
the pack name with the hash of the contents in the
current code, but at the same time I do remember that
was one of the planned things to be done while I and
Linus were working on the original pack design, which
was the last task we did together before he retired from
the maintainership of this project.

Perhaps a config option?  One that becomes standard for git 
2.0?

Anything new is too late for Git 2.0, as we do not want to hold the
switching of push.default to "simple" too long.  End of this year
might be a bit too soon, but I want 2.0 to happen by the next
spring.

You can discuss, design the new naming and necessary transition plan
for existing repositories, reach a concensus and declare the name
switch in the future, and then schedule that for the next major
version bump after 2.0 happens.