For consistency with other APIs that deal with content hashes.
Details
Details
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rDSTO Storage manager
- Branch
- directory_ls_blake2s256
- Lint
No Linters Available - Unit
No Unit Test Coverage - Build Status
Buildable 6008 Build 8251: tox-on-jenkins Jenkins Build 8250: arc lint + arc unit
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Build is green
See https://jenkins.softwareheritage.org/job/DSTO/job/tox/433/ for more details.
Comment Actions
Do we really want to do this?
I'd be inclined to rather drop blake2s256 all together from the storage, given the future of git is sha256 and I don't see us diverging in the short term.
Comment Actions
@zack: I'd be inclined to rather drop blake2s256 all together from the storage, given the future of git is sha256 and I don't see us diverging in the short term.
@vlorentz: No idea. I'm writing new tests for swh-storage, and noticed it was missing here.
If we apply this logic, it's not only on directory that this is missing...
Can we drop this diff then?
That's one less diff hanging.
Comment Actions
If we apply this logic, it's not only on directory that this is missing...
nevermind, i misunderstood the diff.
Nonetheless, if we drop the blake column in content, this diff becomes something to undo later.
So let's discuss this f2f after the weekly meeting (with maybe others ;)
Cheers,
Comment Actions
Linking to T2474 which proposes to drop blake2 from content ;)
(so we can abandon this diff if we do drop it).