Re: VCS comparison table
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 20, 2006, 09:57 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200610201157.22348.jnareb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <45382120.9060702@utoronto.ca>
Aaron Bentley wrote:
>> The naming in git really is beautiful and beautifully simple. > > Well, you've got to admit that those names are at least superficially > ugly.
If you want pretty name, you tag it. Tags are exchanged during fetch/push operation. And you can have pretty names of revisions like v1.4.3
Show 11 quoted lines
>> It's not monotonically increasing from one revision to the next, but >> I've never found that to be an issue. Of course, we do still use our >> own "simple" names for versioning the releases and snapshots of >> software we manage with git, and that's where being able to easily >> determine "newer" or "older" by simple numerical examination is >> important. I've honestly never encountered a situation where I was >> handed two git sha1 sums and wished that I could do the same thing. > > What's nice is being able see the revno 753 and knowing that "diff -r > 752..753" will show the changes it introduced. Checking the revo on a > branch mirror and knowing how out-of-date it is.
Huh? If you want what changes have been introduced by commit c3424aebbf722c1f204931bf1c843e8a103ee143, you just do
# git diff c3424aebbf722c1f204931bf1c843e8a103ee143
(or better "git show" instead of "git diff" or "git diff-tree"). If you give only one commit (only one revision) git automatically gives diff to its parent(s).
By the way, is referring to revision by it's revno _fast_?
-- Jakub Narebski Poland