Re: [PATCH] name-rev: include taggerdate in considering the best name

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>
> I confirmed that it does find the "optimal" tag for the case we've been
> discussing.

Yes. I'm a bit more worried about the date behavior for projects that
merge back stable branches into their development trees (is the
development tag better than the stable tag? the date doesn't really
say much), but I think this is still the simplest model we can use
without trying to really do a topo-sort. And in many ways it's the
simplest one to explain to people too: "we try to use the oldest
reference we can find as a base for the resulting name" is not a
complex or hard concept to explain.

> We could _also_ tweak the merge-weight as Linus's patch did, just
> because 10000 has more basis than 65535. But I think it really matters a
> lot less at this point.

Yes. I still think that my tweak makes more sense than the existing
code, but it's a tiny tweak, compared to the date-based approach.
Unlikely to ever matter much.

            Linus