{"thread":{"id":"3225","subject":"RE: The merge from hell...","startedAt":"2006-02-03T06:04:20Z","lastAt":"2006-02-03T06:33:54Z","messageCount":3,"participants":["Brown, Len","Linus Torvalds","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"15510","messageId":"F7DC2337C7631D4386A2DF6E8FB22B3005EFE838@hdsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com","threadId":"3225","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"RE: The merge from hell...","fromName":"Brown, Len","fromEmail":"len.brown@intel.com","sentAt":"2006-02-03T06:04:20Z","receivedAt":"2006-02-03T06:04:20Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"len.brown@intel.com","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/a091f34f66caadb51d85a8a496800c6ccae73737e2f45762373e6b8c55fa5dd6?d=mp&s=160"},"body":">The 12-way merge was a bit over the top, but it worked. I'd \n>suggest not being quite _that_ aggressive in the future,\n>though, but it's not a big deal.\n\nI favor \"assertive\" over \"aggressive\" --\nI assert that the tools I use must work as advertised;-)\n\n> #define MAXPARENT (16)\n\nHow about setting this #define to the number\nthat you're comfortable with?  Then folks like me --\nwho wouldn't dream of checking code into Linux with a hopped-up git --\nwill simply obey the limit that comes with the tool?\n\n>One thing I'd ask for: would it be possible to have more descriptive \n>branch names than just numbers? Even if you want to track it \n>by bugzilla entry number, how about calling it \"bugzilla-12345\" instead? \n\nbugzilla-#### -- no problem -- will do.\n\nthanks,\n-Len\n\nps. \nIn the back of my head I was worried about using plain\nnumbers when I saw somebody refer to \"shorthand SHA1\".\nHopefully this is an idle worry and it is not possible\nfor the tool to confuse a numeric branch name with a SHA1 id.\n"},{"id":"15511","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.64.0602022210540.3462@g5.osdl.org","threadId":"3225","inReplyTo":"F7DC2337C7631D4386A2DF6E8FB22B3005EFE838@hdsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com","subject":"RE: The merge from hell...","fromName":"Linus Torvalds","fromEmail":"torvalds@osdl.org","sentAt":"2006-02-03T06:16:05Z","receivedAt":"2006-02-03T06:16:05Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"torvalds@linux-foundation.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1024025?v=4"},"body":"\n\nOn Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Brown, Len wrote:\n>\n> In the back of my head I was worried about using plain\n> numbers when I saw somebody refer to \"shorthand SHA1\".\n> Hopefully this is an idle worry and it is not possible\n> for the tool to confuse a numeric branch name with a SHA1 id.\n\nIt _is_ possible, but the rule is that references will be resolved first. \n\nIf you mis-type a reference and it could be construed as a short hex SHA1 \nID (it needs to have more than 5 characters in it to trigger, though), the \nauto-completion of SHA1 ID's could bite you, though.\n\nIt's pretty unlikely, of course. But it's one reason to try to avoid using \nref names that are numeric.\n\n\t\tLinus\n"},{"id":"15513","messageId":"7v1wylj6i5.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"3225","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.64.0602022210540.3462@g5.osdl.org","subject":"Re: The merge from hell...","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2006-02-03T06:33:54Z","receivedAt":"2006-02-03T06:33:54Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:\n\n> On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Brown, Len wrote:\n>>\n>> In the back of my head I was worried about using plain\n>> numbers when I saw somebody refer to \"shorthand SHA1\".\n>> Hopefully this is an idle worry and it is not possible\n>> for the tool to confuse a numeric branch name with a SHA1 id.\n>\n> It _is_ possible, but the rule is that references will be resolved first. \n\nI have to admit that I had this broken for a while.  The\nbreakage was when you have the same numeric branch name _and_\ntagname, then ref resolution was skipped and short SHA1 was\ntaken.  It _might_ have bitten somebody in real life until I\nfixed it.  But I believe this is fixed now.\n\n> It's pretty unlikely, of course. But it's one reason to try to avoid using \n> ref names that are numeric.\n\nOr even non numeric ones, like \"deadbeef\".\n"}]}