Am 02.02.23 um 17:25 schrieb Junio C Hamano: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> As the disruption of changing the default isn't worth it, let's use >> gzip(1) again by default, and only fall back on the new "git archive >> gzip" if it isn't available. > > It perhaps is OK, and lets us answer "ugh, the compressed output of > 'git archive' is unstable again" with "we didn't change anything, > perhaps you changed your gzip(1)?" when they fix bugs or improve > compression or whatever. Of course that is not an overall win for > the end users, but in the short term until gzip gets such a change, > we would presumably get the "same" output as before. Restoring the old default is an understandable reflex. In theory it worsens consistency and stability of the output, but in practice using whatever was found in $PATH did work before -- or at least it was not our problem if it didn't. Are there still people left that would benefit from such a step back, however? As far as I understand forges like GitHub relied on git archive producing the same tgz output across versions. That assumption was violated, trust lost. They had to learn about the configuration option tar.tgz.command or find some other way to cope. Changing the default again won't undo that. René
