‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Git 3.0's upcoming SHA-256 default will be a costly mistake

570 points · 536 comments · chmaynard

  1. nicoburns · · focus · HN ↗
    From what I'd read, SHA256 in git is showing every sign of being another IPv6. In particular:

    - It's implemented in a non-backwards-compatible way

    - The benefits over the older model are a bit nebulous

    - There's a large amount of tooling that needs to catch up, and little sign that there is movement there

    1. gspr · · focus · HN ↗
      > - The benefits over the older model are a bit nebulous

      This is far from the case with IPv6!

      1. post-it · · focus · HN ↗
        Is it? There are many benefits in principle to IPv6, but if my ISP continues to assign me a single dynamic IP, those benefits are entirely moot for me.
        1. bityard · · focus · HN ↗
          If your ISP is assigning you a single IPv6 address, they are doing IPv6 wrong. You should be getting your own /56.
          1. ghusto · · focus · HN ↗
            Every time you use the word "should" you're fighting reality.
            1. gspr · · focus · HN ↗
              Plenty of ISPs do it right (examples: my last 3). That the parent poster's apparently doesn't isn't an argument against the technology their ISP fails to deploy correctly.

              Reality is that lots of ISPs do this right. And have for a very long time.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.