Re: reftable [v5]: new ref storage format
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2017-08-08 07:38:13
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 07:41:43AM -0700, Shawn Pearce wrote:
quoted
As such if JGit wanted to use a longer key size, it is possible to implement similar automatic builds and packaging into JGit.I don't know if we need a larger key size. $DAY_JOB limits ref names to ~200 bytes in a hook. I think GitHub does similar. But I'm worried about the general masses who might be using our software and expect ref names thus far to be as long as PATH_MAX on their system. Most systems run PATH_MAX around 1024.
GitHub limits to 255 (for the fully-qualified name, so including "refs/heads/"). I don't recall ever seeing any complaints about that, though I suppose it's not out of the realm of possibility for somebody with a multi-byte encoding to hit with a real name (it's configurable, so I'm not sure if Enterprise customers in Asia might ever bump it). I do think something like 1024 would be well into "you're insane if you really want to name your branch this" territory. -Peff