Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> to follow the above, in my view, interaction with sha1 repos go >> through some conversion bridges like what we have with hg and svn. I >> don't know if we are going this route. It's certainly simpler and >> people already have experiences (from previous migration) to prepare >> for it. > > When treating the SHA1 version as a foreign dvcs and the SHA256 > as the real deal, we could introduce "pointer objects", and during the > conversion > create a 4e55ed3 pointer that points to the SHA256 commit of (add: > add --chmod=+x / --chmod=-x options, 2016-05-31). Hmmm. If you are designing this "pointer objects" to be extensible enough to cover other foreign vcs (i.e.e.g. you make it to be capable of mapping Subversion's r24323 to a matching commit in the converted result), I would think it may be a very useful thing to have, but I think it is pretty much orthogonal to the discussion in this topic. IOW, that can happen with or without change of the hash function. And looking at it that way, I am not sure if such a mapping feature should require adding a new type of "object". -- 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