From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b1-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b1-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.152]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36709199252 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 22:42:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.152 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745361751; cv=none; b=EcVvFVymcYPC0cX91OjPIBMtbmQ/p8qB1xQsqVpepNumph/7zQ12Bw8uo35OlDVOhYXz3obeOkKAa8zXOcbGtAC2XuwolaMTjft7YR8+1ppThx5tHLWrk+Q+0pdmh4dr5pjDLJAxcyuIcYifWvNTD7A0Jr0h8GViXE3OIKyPEBE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745361751; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6NSrkCzYdDcumCZmbjPpQkpG7DApTZIM9siE+zARrSA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=l9kglFfJTLlAmw5nI3rdRhJkXsXhvb3EZDUu1vw43p37n8omhkPglC5Vg90QvIutvB7vzQdRzkHKzwSY11y49qXMHMMNnK1jRfD9WlPk18yqbmeVYwCgsrD3hrN0Gb070Pb6Xv6/NCyd05YqTnM1RyPAvFsRkHHBqyJN+IsCIjA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=k9vA4Lcm; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=SLMcAfKz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.152 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="k9vA4Lcm"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="SLMcAfKz" Received: from phl-compute-01.internal (phl-compute-01.phl.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE460254015C; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 18:42:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-01.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 22 Apr 2025 18:42:28 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1745361747; x=1745448147; bh=XrNd+Q7p2y JOPpQvTnbxZExROTEafrUuampfACsxmwA=; b=k9vA4LcmE/o0+6Fm1Uj8xD46VI trmdcZwo9FCuMeKD7FW9rzesUDOhBjjq/1KHNZ3bhwQ6qSwX/0Di5cFJDZ3eWUSv ziEVT53+Wp+DHEcD9Er4jAC5Bd6Z9v/JMgVf7No9PcZkaRIIBeKrhwmjY6bJjFcq GotQSngIP44JGRm/mqCFhHMlHAiVUaSn9n+psaK2YAQpcmOFMmKGYa1IiPxrmhZo 8y1EPEexhRkmiTFhKU9ZYdtsctqGZtBXhlnGZAPcvp88CW4pqK56ejUuqYvovNga DPcnZQeqgCBBo4fzjHjeF/FIuxcd7yTKHhhclYZ0No6/An3ebvkLExHjgNPw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1745361747; x=1745448147; bh=XrNd+Q7p2yJOPpQvTnbxZExROTEafrUuamp fACsxmwA=; b=SLMcAfKzaGCTg5G7yXL5/fcd/pzOuzjlXbV4E+y5RJ3ehZsHH2C UK7IyjT3wAX5VdkD3ALTfa44Ex16cTPWVAB/pWatC7jv8WaM3Tf4d5oIC768l7u1 raMB4rKfoM9X/D36U8cFPhHsSTdfXlhJaOjA4iE4PkHM0nGsbku4xsdOM/ou1136 IZVeY6kk476EFJPRWwpmmEuwEF4YoN7GZ8s3KN3P0ccFc2tnLTp2GEbRx02RoPu/ +89lKVt4mpPG9R0B5cY5EasfSIgcrYaVIVJ0FXGGJ5nAk9wTzM+qmTo4vfk9W31z kXuGzjVtExWkF50Bjtiqxvi2EgGn5q5EeAQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgddvgeegleehucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggv pdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpih gvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttder tdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcuvecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosg hogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeu feejleeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeeigeeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrg hrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghr tghpthhtohepuddtpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehrvghmohessg huvghniihlihdruggvvhdprhgtphhtthhopegsvghnrdhknhhosghlvgesghhmrghilhdr tghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmpdhrtg hpthhtohepthihthhsohesmhhithdrvgguuhdprhgtphhtthhopehmrghrthhinhhvohhn iiesghhoohhglhgvrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlh drohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopegvkhgvmhhpihhnsehgohhoghhlvgdrtghomhdprhgtphht thhopehstghothhtsehgihhtsghuthhlvghrrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepphhhihhlih hpmhgvthiighgvrhessghluhgvfihinhdrtghh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 18:42:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Remo Senekowitsch" Cc: "D. Ben Knoble" , "Nico Williams" , "Theodore Ts'o" , "Martin von Zweigbergk" , "Git Mailing List" , "Edwin Kempin" , "Scott Chacon" , "philipmetzger@bluewin.ch" Subject: Re: Semantics of change IDs (Re: Gerrit, GitButler, and Jujutsu projects collaborating on change-id commit footer) In-Reply-To: (Remo Senekowitsch's message of "Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:24:06 +0200") References: <20250408125521.GA17892@mit.edu> <20250409121924.GA148735@mit.edu> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 15:42:25 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Remo Senekowitsch" writes: > Btw. since the thread was started, the implementation in Jujutsu has > been completed and I've been pushing commits with the change-id header > to various remotes for a while now. It works well. Forges can start > taking advantage of it. (I hope I find time to help work on that.) It should work well, until somebody finds your random is not random enough, right? Unlike our object name that depends on the contents (hence a duplicate unless the cryptographic hash function collides means they are truly the same commit), there is no grabally unique ID assigner involved in your implementation, right? Until sufficiently large number of people start using and large number of changes gets assigned IDs, it won't become an issue, but then how would it be different from what was raised in the earlier discussion to use the commit object name itself as the change ID for a commit that is not derived from anybody else, and copy that ID to commits that are derived from the original commit as the change ID shared among them? At least that would give us a much better uniqueness guarantee, wouldn't it? If you want to be able to tell between commit object name and change ID, I wouldn't object if you encode them using whatever mechanism.