On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 4:21 AM brian m. carlson
<sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The transition plan anticipates us using a syntax such as "^{sha1}" for
> disambiguation. Since this is a syntax some people will be typing a
> lot, it makes sense to provide a short, easy-to-type syntax. Omitting
> the dash doesn't create any ambiguity, but it does make it shorter and
"but" or "and"? I think both clauses are on the same side ... or did
you mean omitting the dash does create ambiguity?
> easier to type, especially for touch typists. In addition, the
> transition plan already uses "sha1" in this context.
>
> Rename the name of SHA-1 implementation to "sha1".
>
> Note that this change creates no backwards compatibility concerns, since
> we haven't yet used this field in any serialized data formats.
But we're not going to use this _string_ in any data format either
because we'll stick to format_id field anyway, right?
--
Duy
