Re: Stability of git-archive, breaking (?) the Github universe, and a possible solution

> 
> On Tue, Jan 31 2023, brian m. carlson wrote:
> 
> > Since then, I've been very opposed to us guaranteeing output format
> > consistency without explicitly doing so.  I had sent some patches before
> > that I don't think ever got picked up that documented this explicitly.
> > I very much don't want people to come to rely on our behaviour unless we
> > explicitly guarantee it.
> 
> FWIW I think the reason that didn't get picked up (I went back and read
> the discussion) is that there was some feedback on the v1, [1] suggested
> (at least to me) that you'd re-roll it, but that re-roll never seems to
> have made it to the list.