Subject: Re: When should we release Git 3.0?

From: Michal Suchánek <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 18:20:05 +0200

Hello,

On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 12:01:20PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 11:07:42PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > Almost all of the functionality that we had wanted in Git 3.0 has been
> > implemented.  The two major things we may want to consider as blockers
> > for Git 3.0 are the following:
> >
> > * The SHA-256 interoperability work is not done yet.  My estimate of
> >   this work is 200–400 patches, of which about 100 are done.  If the
> >   original schedule is maintained, this would require writing up to 75
> >   patches and sending in 100 patches per cycle, which is unrealistic
> >   without additional contributors.

>From my very limited point of view as a user the interop is the major
planned feature currently missing in git, and I do not see much point
without it. Then again I do not know how useful it will be in practice.

> I need to polish up the notes from the Contributor's Summit and share
> them with the list, but my general feeling at the end of the discussion
> on the SHA-256 interoperability work was that it wasn't clear whether or
> not it should be a blocker for Git 3.0.
> 
> If post-3.0 repositories are using SHA-256, then either their post-Git
> 3.0 clients will also use SHA-256, or the pre-3.0 clients (without
> interop support) will be unable to interact with them. I don't think
> there would be any reason to have a interop-capable client use a SHA-256
> repository in SHA-1 mode.

Flipping the default to sha256 would clearly break some things. I can
use sha256 repositories in gitea today (no interop whatsoever) but
github rejects them.

Then again cloning a repository uses the correct hash which means if I
create the repository on the forge and clone it there is no problem
whatsoever regardless of hash used. Whill that break as well?

Thanks

Michal