On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 04:53:36 pm Junio C Hamano wrote: > Martin Fick <mfick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > 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? -Martin -- The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html