On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 12:10:01PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:31:07AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > > > My biggest concern here was trying to understand what could break. > > Having read the patches from Johannes and thought about it a lot, I have > > a pretty good handle on where Git itself cares about the name. And I > > feel pretty confident that we can make the change in a way that won't > > cause problems there (and in fact, I think some of the code will be > > made more robust by relying on HEAD more appropriately). > > > > There's a more open question of what _else_ will break in the ecosystem. > > What if we work on making this configurable for now, but stick with the > legacy name until we introduce breaking sha1 changes? Almost everything > will need to retool for those anyway (and all documentation rewritten), > so it is reasonable to bundle these changes to happen at the same time. I wonder if allowing the buildsystem to set this default value would be a wortwhile stepping stone. This way we can test things in different ecosystems. Thoughts? -Santiago
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
