Re: Subversion-style incrementing revision numbers
- From
Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
- Date
- Sep 19, 2006, 22:06 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20060919220604.GE8259@pasky.or.cz>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609191416500.4388@g5.osdl.org>
Dear diary, on Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 11:51:49PM CEST, I got a letter where Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> said that...
Show 9 quoted lines
> Another thing you CAN do, is to just number them in time in a single repo. > Every time you do a commit, you can create a "r1.<n+1>" revision, and that > would work. It wouldn't look like the SVN numbers do, and it would only > work _within_ that repository, but it would work. > > But it would mean that "r1.57" is _not_ necessarily the child of "r1.56". > It might be that "r1.56" was done on another branch, and is totally > unrelated to "r1.57" (other than they sharing some common ancestor far > back).
This is actually exactly how SVN revision numbering works. There's just a single number (no '1.') and it indeed jumps randomly if you have several concurrent branches in your (ok, Linus does not have any, just someone's) repository.
> You're going to hit a few confusing issues if you really want to call > things "r1.x.y.z"
Noone does, that indeed would be horrible. But having the commits numbered inside a repository would indeed make for simple usage if you need to type in commit ids frequently, and could make Git a bit friendlier to newcomers.
-- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise. Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam