Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

100% Positive

Analyzed from 139 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#history#repo#git#rewrite#switching#vulnerabilities#repositories#switch#push#nuke

Discussion (7 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

drgo2 minutes ago
git nuke --rust-rewrite --for-the-love-of-god
KolmogorovCompabout 1 hour ago
Does it mean that when switching trop sha1 to sha256 you need to forcepush and rewrite all history? Wouldn’t that be a massive source of potential vulnerabilities?
em-bee31 minutes ago
i guess that for now only the default will change for new repositories. support for sha1 is not going to be dropped, so most existing repositories won't switch any time soon. if you want to switch then yes, it sounds like a force push might be needed, although it could also be that simply switching is not possible, but that instead you have to create a new repo and import the history from the old repo, forcing everyone to clone the new repo intentionally.
nomelabout 1 hour ago
I don't know much about this. How does that enable vulnerabilities exactly?
jayd16about 1 hour ago
Trusting a forced push w/o any other verification means nefarious history changes can be slipped in.
wtfwhateven15 minutes ago
WCSTombsabout 1 hour ago
`git add --resolved` is a wonderful idea, and definitely something I would start using.