Re: Git commit generation numbers
- From
Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
- Date
- Jul 20, 2011, 23:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LFD.2.00.1107201931510.21187@xanadu.home>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.DEB.2.02.1107201624510.5222@asgard.lang.hm>
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011, david@lang.hm wrote:
Show 12 quoted lines
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2011, George Spelvin wrote: > > > > The alternative of having to sometimes use the generation number, > > > sometimes use the possibly broken commit date, makes for much more > > > complicated code that has to be maintained forever. Having a solution > > > that starts working only after a certain point in history doesn't look > > > eleguant to me at all. It is not like having different pack formats > > > where back and forth conversions can be made for the _entire_ history. > > > > It seemed like a pretty strong argument to me, too. > > except that you then have different caches on different systems.
So what?
> If the generation number is part of the repository then it's going to > be the same for everyone.
The actual generation number will be, and has to be, the same for everyone with the same repository content, regardless of the cache used. It is a well defined number with no room to interpretation.
> in either case, you still have the different heristics depending on what > version of git someone is running
Indeed.
Nicolas