Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx> wrote: > > FYI the reason the SHA1 hashes are used for revisions is because of > > the decentralized nature. When everyone has their own repo, what > > does > > r1234 mean? Your r1234 might be totally different than mine. You > > just > > can't have a global atomic incremental revision number in > > decentralized systems. > 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. Mercurial also supports revision numbers for each repository - in addition to the hash value. That means that as long as we have an official repository (I agree with Ingo that we should always have this), there could also be meaningful revision numbers with "hg" as well. I've played around with both, git and Mercurial in the past a bit, but using it on-top of SVN is at least inconvenient. Unlike git's SVN support, Mercurial's is not really ready for use, though. Bye, Axel.