Re: Subversion-style incrementing revision numbers
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Sep 19, 2006, 22:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <Pine.LNX.4.63.0609200038120.19042@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.62.0609191609090.9752@joeldicepc.ecovate.com>
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Joel Dice wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> The scenario I envision is several developers, each with a clone of a > shared repository. The clones would not have IRNs turned on, only the > shared repository. So, when I do a "git push", I get an IRN back, and I > am not confused, because I know that IRN only applies to the shared > repository. Then, when I mark a Bugzilla bug as fixed and attach the IRN > to it, everybody knows that IRN refers to the shared repository. After > all, I wouldn't mark the bug fixed if I had only committed it to my own > private repository.
Why not just tag the commit with something like "bugzilla/#bugid"? Granted, it makes for lots of tags. But we actually handle lots of tags.
BTW if your IRN just wants to serve to be less cryptic than SHA1s, you can try git-name-rev (of course, it is only immutable if you have a recent tag and use the --tags option).
Ciao, Dscho