Any plans/needs to extend the fast-import format?

[Greg Ward]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Shawn O. Pearce<spearce at spearce.org> wrote:
>> If missing, git 1.6 would be assumed. If present, old importers would
>> stop on finding a command they didn't understand?
>
> Yes, that seems sane, but I'd hate to lock into a particular
> version number.  Instead we might get better mileage by declaring
> features that the stream uses, and then parses which do not know
> that feature abort:
>
>  feature multiple-authors
>  feature ghost-revisions
>  feature ...

I definitely agree with Shawn on this one: an explicit feature list
beats a format version number any day.  If an importer does not
support a feature, or doesn't even know what the command 'feature'
means, it should die.

Greg