On 19. 1. 26 13:25, Evgeny Kotkov wrote:
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.
Off topic, but we don't even need a different checksum type, just use
both SHA-1 and MD5 that we already compute as the unique key...
-- Brane
