On 2008-06-14 at 23:55:14 [+0200], Ryan Leavengood <leavengood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > As long as there is an official repository (and IMHO there should always > > be > > one), that one could generate the revision numbers. I understand why > > hashes > > are used, but I agree with Michael that they are by far not as handy as > > revision numbers. > > Yeah, I agree on both points. There might be a way to have a git > commit hook or something that could generate normal SVN-style revision > numbers whenever commits are pushed to it. But day to day you might > need to use the SHA1 hashes. But I have yet to use them myself for > anything. At least in Haiku's case the revision numbers are even built into the Haiku image. And in Trac they are undeniably very handy as references. Something like "this bug was introduced somewhere between r23415 and r23890" sounds significantly more helpful than the hash alternative. When Haiku starts with releases, maybe bugs will be reported mainly for release versions, but until then I think it really is advantageous to have the revision numbers. CU, Ingo