From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Cc: "git\@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] t8008: rely on rev-parse'd HEAD instead of sha1 value
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 12:38:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqk235o7rm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kbTQ=eSoDCRFTt_B3kjDbWZDkcPwc3fMvhd8dEKPWr-8A@mail.gmail.com> (Stefan Beller's message of "Tue, 18 Jul 2017 12:22:35 -0700")
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>>
>>> Remove hard coded sha1 values, obtain the values using 'git rev-parse HEAD'
>>> which should be future proof regardless of the hash function used.
>>
>> Don't hardcoded lengths of the hashes defeat this future-proofing
>> effort, though? It shouldn't be too hard to do the equivalent of
>> the auto computation of abbreviation in this script, which would be
>> true future-proofing, I guess.
>
> It depends on the definition of future proofing.
> My definition here only included the change of the hash function,
> not the change of display length in git-blame for a small artificial repo
> with 2 commits . These seem to be unrelated, so in case we'd change
> the length of the abbreviated displayed hash, we'd still want to have
> a test to tell us?
The thing is that depending on how these 2 commits hash and share
prefixes, the length needed to disambiguate changes.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-18 19:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-18 0:20 [PATCH] t8008: rely on rev-parse'd HEAD instead of sha1 value Stefan Beller
2017-07-18 19:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-18 19:22 ` Stefan Beller
2017-07-18 19:38 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2017-07-26 19:06 ` [PATCHv2] " Stefan Beller
2017-07-26 20:32 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqk235o7rm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.