Re: [doc] User Manual Suggestion
- From
Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 3, 2009, 01:26 UTC
- Message-ID
- <b4087cc50905021826o2b259009pda15dcaaa135ca38@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <ca433830905021818v5c99cce4q57902eba8ff3d7fc@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 20:18, Mark Lodato <lodatom@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> 2009/5/2 Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>: >> I also dislike the use of 'name' rather than 'hash'; a name is >> something provided by the user, but a hash is something computed. The >> use of sha[-]1 is even more egregious. > > What about "identifier" as a compromise between "hash" and "name"? > This is really what we're talking about - a way of identifying > objects.
It's the same problem, in my opinion. '[Cryptographic] hash' says so much more and still remains quite generic.
Also, continuing with 'sha1' doesn't seem satisfactory:
http://marc.info/?l=git&m=124068702303042&w=2