LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willy Tarreau <>
To: Junio C Hamano <>
Subject: Re: [Announce] GIT v1.5.0-rc2
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 14:43:08 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Hi Junio !

On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 03:20:06AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> BTW, as the upcoming v1.5.0 release will introduce quite a bit of
> surface changes (although at the really core it still is the old
> git and old ways should continue to work), I am wondering if it
> would help people to try out and find wrinkles before the real
> thing for me to cut a tarball and a set of RPM packages.
> Comments?

Anything you can do to make tester's life easier will always slightly
increase the number of testers. Hint: how often do you try random
software that requires that you first install CVS, SVN or arch just to
get it, compared to how often you try random software provided as tar.gz ?
Pre-release tar.gz and rpms coupled with a freshmeat announcement should
get you a bunch of testers and newcomers. This will give the new doc a
real trial, and will help discover traps in which beginners often fall.

> Also, in the same spirit of giving the release an early
> exposure, here is the current draft of 1.5.0 release notes.


>  - There is a configuration variable core.legacyheaders that
>    changes the format of loose objects so that they are more
>    efficient to pack and to send out of the repository over git
>    native protocol, since v1.4.2.  However, loose objects
>    written in the new format cannot be read by git older than
>    that version; people fetching from your repository using
>    older clients over dumb transports (e.g. http) using older
>    versions of git will also be affected.
>  - Since v1.4.3, configuration repack.usedeltabaseoffset allows
>    packfile to be created in more space efficient format, which
>    cannot be read by git older than that version.

I know it's a bit late to ask, but if new on-disk format changes, isn't
it time to bump the version to 2.0 ? It would be easier for many people to
remember that GIT 1.X uses format version 1 and that GIT 2.X uses format
version 2 with backwards compatibility with 1.X. I also think that 1.5
is much more different from 1.0 than a mid-term 2.0 would be from current

That said, kudos for the nice changelog !


  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-01-21 13:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-01-21  8:56 Junio C Hamano
2007-01-21 11:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-21 13:42   ` Bill Lear
2007-01-21 13:52     ` Bill Lear
2007-01-21 21:26       ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-21 21:33         ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-21 22:01           ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-21 22:24             ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-21 13:43   ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2007-01-21 15:06     ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-21 18:58     ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-21 19:49       ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-01-22 17:23         ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-01-21 20:01       ` Horst H. von Brand
2007-01-22  1:27         ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-21 19:46   ` Horst H. von Brand
2007-01-21 21:55   ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-21 22:45     ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-22 18:08   ` Carl Worth
2007-01-22 19:28     ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-23  1:01       ` Carl Worth
2007-01-22 18:22   ` Jakub Narebski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [Announce] GIT v1.5.0-rc2' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).