Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Move init_skiplist() outside of fsck

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 18, 2019, 17:36 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqzhrxlvfj.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <87k1j247ui.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:

Show 15 quoted lines

> On Thu, Jan 17 2019, Barret Rhoden wrote:
>
>> -		die("Could not open skip list: %s", path);
>> [...]
>> +		die("Could not open skip list: %s", path);
>
> You're just moving this around, but now that this has two uses let's say
> "Could not open SHA-1 list; %s" or something like that.
>
>> +			die("Invalid SHA-1: %s", sb.buf);
>
> Unlike Johannes I think it's fine to leave this. This file-format is
> SHA-1 only now. We can cross the bridge of making it (and others)
> SHA-256 somehow when we come to that, whether that'll be allowing
> variable width or a different file.

I tend to agree. The Documentation/glossary-contents.txt makes it clear that "object name" is the most formal term to use here, with synonyms like "object identifier" and much less formal "hash". For now, "SHA-1" is good enough, even though "object name" is acceptable if we really want to future-proof. But I would suspect that people would colloquially keep saying Shaah-one even when we start using different hash function(s), so such a future-proofing may not be worth it ;-)