4 ms·

"Unprofessional" is an odd choice of word. I cannot see what you mean. He explains why he wrote the post: "since the SHA1 collision attack was so prominently i

"Unprofessional" is an odd choice of word. I cannot see what you mean. He explains why he wrote the post: "since the SHA1 collision attack was so prominently in the news." I think a lot of people on Hacker News and elsewhere are interested in both the SHA1 collision and how it affects git, even if it doesn't impact them. Still, even if this were some obscure bug that nobody cared about, what would be unprofessional about explaining his plan to fix it? It's an open-source project, after all. If anything, I'd say it's quite professional that he's calmly explained why there's no need to panic, that they have everything under control, and that the path forward should be smooth.

debatem1 10y ago
The issue is that this could have been fixed years ago. All the information needed to move forward today was also available the last time this got brought up. Fixing it then would have better for git's users (because they wouldn't have freaked out over this) and better for git (because it never would have even come up in the SHA1 discussion) and better for Linus (because he wouldn't have had to spend an hour writing a blog post about this). So why not do it then? It's frustrating, because Linus clearly isn't stupid. And yet sometimes he does stuff like this where I can't help but go "how did you not see the unforced error you were making?".