From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Baudis Subject: Re: Subversion-style incrementing revision numbers Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 00:11:11 +0200 Message-ID: <20060919221111.GF8259@pasky.or.cz> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 20 00:11:36 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GPnoI-0003Kj-Sk for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 00:11:23 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751191AbWISWLO (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:11:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751229AbWISWLO (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:11:14 -0400 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:64385 "EHLO machine.or.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751191AbWISWLN (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:11:13 -0400 Received: (qmail 24798 invoked by uid 2001); 20 Sep 2006 00:11:11 +0200 To: Jakub Narebski Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-message-flag: Outlook : A program to spread viri, but it can do mail too. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Dear diary, on Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 12:07:08AM CEST, I got a letter where Jakub Narebski said that... > Joel Dice wrote: > > Rationale: > > > > Incrementing revision numbers (IRNs - an acronym I just made up) are > > useful in that they can be treated as auto-generated tags which are easier > > to remember and communicate than SHA hashes, yet do not require extra > > effort to create like real tags. Also, they have the advantage of being > > chronologically ordered, so if I assert that a bug was fixed in revision > > 42 of a shared repository, everyone may assume that revision 45 has that > > fix as well. > > That is true _only_ if you have linear history. If you have multiple > concurrent branches, revision 42 can be in branch 'next', revision '45' in > topic branch 'xx/topic' which forked before revision 42, and do not have > the fix. Oops, I've completely overlooked that bit of the rationale. Of course IRNs cannot assure this. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise. Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam