From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:24:47 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] git packages and revision number length In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20131023142447.7d45e0d3@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Thomas De Schampheleire, On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 13:54:01 +0200, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > I disagree with that. The first 7 characters do not guarantee that a > few years from now their will not be an ambiguity in that project, > where two revisions have the same 7 initial characters. > > Shortened revision numbers are great in communication (verbal, mail, > IRC, ...) but should not be committed in a build system that is > supposed to create reproducible builds over a long-term lifespan. > > We can start discussing statistics, about how many years it takes on > average for a clash to occur with a given revision number length, but > the fact is that it is possible to have a clash by tomorrow. Only the > chances are much smaller with increasing lengths. > > So I propose to change that recommendation (and the packages that use > it) and use the full 40-hex-char revision numbers. I agree with you, especially since using reduced 7-hex-char revision numbers over full 40-hex-char revision numbers doesn't bring any specific advantage. Using full hashes doesn't hurt, and is more future-proof so let's do it. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com