From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 19:34:02 GMT
Subject: Re: Distribution of longest common hash prefixes
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.98.0704031529300.28181@xanadu.home>
In-Reply-To: <7vhcrxz5a8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> 
> > Yeah, the short SHA1 form is obviously always going to be risky. But in 
> > practice, since people almost always use it just for commits, it's 
> > probably good enough in practice, and even if you get a collision in 8 
> > nibbles, most of the time it will probably be trivial to figure out which 
> > one was meant, so it's not like it's a disaster if somebody ends up 
> > reporting a bug with a non-unique abbreviation.
> 
> Are you hinting to update sha1_name.c::get_sha1() so that we do
> not accept abbreviated non-commit object names?

NO, I hope not.

Instead (and if the concern is real) we should error out when the 
abbreviated name is ambigous and impose no restriction otherwise.


Nicolas