On Wed, 04 May 2011 21:51:29 +0200, Oliver Tappe <zooey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
When talking about consistent revision IDs in Git, are these the same aswhat is output by 'git describe' (tag name + number of commits since then + hash)?I think those are indeed consistent (i.e. they never change between repos),but they are still a bit clumsy (long and not easy to compare).I was referring to IDs like 'hrev40283' (or indeed 'r40283' as we use inTrac) that sticks to a specific changeset and gets moved alongside of thatchangeset wherever it goes, i.e. that changeset can be referred by that name in any repo.
I think the output of git describe might be more useful, as it contains more information. 'r1a1-226-4acf445' makes it obvious that this is referring to a changeset somewhere after R1 alpha 1, but before R1 alpha 2 (tagged r1a2, obviously). Also, in the future you might want to provide nightly builds of experimental branches, resulting, for example, in 'multiuser-192-996c136'. The hash isn't absolutely necessary, I suppose (unless rebasing?), so we could drop that to make it more readable.