Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH 02/23] refs.h: clarify docstring for the ref_transaction_update()-related fns

Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> In particular, make it clear that they make copies of the sha1
>> arguments.
> A couple weeks ago we had plans on getting rid of SHA1 in
> "the near future" IIRC.  Would it make sense to not go down
> the SHA1 road further and document this in a more abstract way?
>     s/SHA1/object name/
> essentially, but I guess one of Brians future series' may pick this
> up as well.
> I am just hesitant to introduce more sha1-ism at this point.

Don't worry too much about it.  These new paragraphs explain
existing new_sha1 and old_sha1 parameters, and when they are updated
to new_oid/old_oid, the comment will get updated at the same time to