Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > Yeah, I agree with this line of reasoning. I'd prefer to see it > addressed now, so that we don't have to remember to do anything later. Very true. Also the documentation may need some updating, e.g. "These 4 extensions are honored without adding repositoryFormatVersion to your repository (as special cases)" to avoid further confusion e.g. "why doesn't my objectFormat=SHA-3 does not take effect by itself?". > I.e., for this patch to put the existing known extensions into the > "good" list for v0, locking it into place forever, and leaving the > objectformat topic with nothing particular it needs to do. > > But in the name of -rc1 expediency, I'm also OK moving forward with this > for now. I'm OK, too, as I said. I'd need to kick out bc/sha-2-part-3 topic out of my tree while that infrastructure is in place on top of these two patches, though. Thanks.
