Branko Čibej <[email protected]> writes: > The question that needs to be answered: how does the added complexity of > what you describe above compare with changing the, or adding another, > hash type to the pristines metadata?
As far as I can tell, there isn't much added complexity in supporting different hash types in a working copy: it's a linear technical change that makes the existing behavior configurable. To some extent, it can even be viewed as a cleanup, because it centralizes hardcoded references to the SHA-1 checksum algorithm. (For illustration, the core change is r1906821 on the pristine-checksum-kind branch.) Thanks, Evgeny Kotkov
